[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B01EC3BB6@HASMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:57:28 +0000
From: "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"sameo@...ux.intel.com" <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [char-misc-next 05/11] mei: bus: Call bus routines from the
core code
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@...db.de]
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 00:38
> To: Winkler, Tomas
> Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; sameo@...ux.intel.com; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [char-misc-next 05/11] mei: bus: Call bus routines from the core
> code
>
> On Thursday 07 February 2013, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > @@ -197,6 +197,9 @@ static int mei_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const
> struct pci_device_id *ent)
> > mei_pdev = pdev;
> > pci_set_drvdata(pdev, dev);
> >
> > + err = mei_bus_init(mei_pdev);
> > + if (err)
> > + goto deregister_mei;
> >
> > schedule_delayed_work(&dev->timer_work, HZ);
> >
>
> This is fairly unusual, and will break if you ever have multiple mei devices in
> one system, because you end up registering the bus type for each device. I
> think it would be more logical to register/unregister the bus_type from the
> module_init/exit functions of the module that contains the bus_type object.
MEI is a singleton and it is enforced also in software in the probe
Second why to register anything if the MEI device is not present on the system.
Thanks
Tomas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists