Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031342AbWKUTlK (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2006 14:41:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1031339AbWKUTlK (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2006 14:41:10 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.191]:35860 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031343AbWKUTlG (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2006 14:41:06 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:date:from:reply-to:x-priority:message-id:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=kahrFjtFdSOHWdMHJMwIS2AHw4rF3Ma5nPS/wqaZdKowAgRXUL0X47ITH3AdYR1OgqMAAWvjGQNOE3DXpatbvBsGyxRw1yG2xkU1GqFIyrqQKyOjuEQzg2Tosz7sNq4w/Bn1Ftf73UO4kEAopVdRHc6nTG+/WcLXpFU1hEm/amU= Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 21:41:06 +0200 From: Paul Sokolovsky Reply-To: Paul Sokolovsky X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1928395959.20061121214106@gmail.com> To: Evgeniy Polyakov CC: Matthew Frost , Arjan van de Ven , , Adrian Bunk , Greg KH Subject: Re[2]: Where did find_bus() go in 2.6.18? In-Reply-To: <20061121190150.GA25754@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <1154868495.20061120003437@gmail.com> <4560ECAF.1030901@gmail.com> <664994303.20061120021314@gmail.com> <1164011675.31358.566.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <4563457B.2070806@sbcglobal.net> <20061121190150.GA25754@2ka.mipt.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2475 Lines: 69 Hello Evgeniy, Tuesday, November 21, 2006, 9:01:50 PM, you wrote: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 12:29:15PM -0600, Matthew Frost (artusemrys@sbcglobal.net) wrote: >> So you have nested drivers. Matthew, thanks for your help, but it wasn't really my intention to waste other people's time with fixing our drivers. We are kernel hackers themselves, and eat our dogfood - with each kernel release, we have bunch of drivers breaking, and we patiently fix them (and yes, with recent releases, number of such drivers reduces, and that makes us really happy with recent 2.6 releases). But, this particular case made me wonder - was it some issue with change made in mainline, or there's something wrong with our manner to write drivers? And we'd like to be updated in the latter case. [] >> >> (cc: E. Polyakov for the w1 expertise) > Hello. > If find_bus() will not be resurrected, I can export w1_bus_type or > create special helpers to directly access w1 bus master devices. > But in that case there is no need to have all driver model in w1 > subsystem at all... Thanks for your response, Evgeniy! Ok, so now it's not just me, it's the maintainer of a bus subsystem in mainline. There's no wonders, and one uncareful change in core API will cascade to many other places. Commented out find_bus()? Now need to make sure all bus types structures are exported. At least. But maybe maintainers will also wonder what happens here, and shouldn't they provide adhoc API to query a specific bus? And then indeed, what is the use of LDM? Where did go idea of having common, bus- and driver- independent API to do consistently all the stuff one *may* need (not all feature of which everyone necessarily uses all the time). P.S. find_bus()is hardly a threat for kernel binary size and for bringing more 2.4 users to 2.6: http://lxr.linux.no/source/drivers/base/bus.c?v=2.6.18#L602 Well, I'd actually hardly ventured into arguing that its removal may be not exactly right, if it wasn't such an obvious case of crippling API for no real benefit. But it's not long cry for 2 lines of code, but for understanding of where kernel goes... >> Matt -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/