linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] drivers: misc: use module_platform_driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHkwnC_4kVGcs03_6RVNrye21aUHsCWf9rQe=2JP_Nkjk8Yczw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:09:18 +0100
From:	Fabio Porcedda <fabio.porcedda@...il.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-media <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-ide <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
	lm-sensors <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>,
	linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fbdev <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@...ionengravers.com>,
	Hans-Christian Egtvedt <hans-christian.egtvedt@...el.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] drivers: misc: use module_platform_driver_probe()

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Friday 15 March 2013, Fabio Porcedda wrote:
>> >> * Regarding the use of module_platform_driver_probe, I'm a little worried about
>> >>   the interactions with deferred probing. I don't think there are any regressions,
>> >>   but we should probably make people aware that one cannot return -EPROBE_DEFER
>> >>   from a platform_driver_probe function.
>>
>> The use of module_platform_driver_probe() doesn't change anything about that,
>> it's exactly the same thing as using "return platform_driver_probe()".
>> I'm right or I'm missing something? Maybe are you just speaking about
>> the misuse of "platform_driver_probe"?
>
> Yes, that was what I meant. The point is that if we need to review or remove
> all uses of platform_driver_probe, it would be better not to introduce a
> module_platform_driver_probe() interface to make it easier to use.

Just to let you know, the module_platform_driver_probe() macro is
already in v3.9-rc1 and is already used by some drivers.
In linux-next there are already many patches that use that macro.

Best regards
--
Fabio Porcedda
--
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/