[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1429719077.2195.37.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:11:17 -0700
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Kweh, Hock Leong" <hock.leong.kweh@...el.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
"Ong, Boon Leong" <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>,
Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Roy Franz <roy.franz@...aro.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] efi: an sysfs interface for user to update efi
firmware
On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 17:46 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 08:35:54AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-04-15 at 15:19 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:32:29AM +0000, Kweh, Hock Leong wrote:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman [mailto:gregkh@...uxfoundation.org]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 10:09 PM
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 05:44:56PM +0800, Kweh, Hock Leong wrote:
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > +static void __exit efi_capsule_loader_exit(void)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + platform_device_unregister(efi_capsule_pdev);
> > > > >
> > > > > This is not a platform device, don't abuse that interface please.
> > > > >
> > > > > greg k-h
> > > >
> > > > Okay, so you would recommend to use device_register() for this case?
> > > > Or you would think that this is more suitable to use class_register()?
> > >
> > > A class isn't needed, you just want a device right? So just use a
> > > device, but not a platform device, as that isn't what you have here.
> >
> > Coming back to this, am I the only one confused here? What is a
> > 'platform device' then? Because if it doesn't fit a direct channel to
> > the platform firmware, which seems to be one of the definitions covered
> > in driver-model/platform.txt under devices with minimal infrastructure
> > then perhaps the documentation needs updating.
>
> I don't remember the original code here at all, sorry. I'm guessing
> that they were using a class, and a platform device together, which is
> not a good idea. Just make a "virtual" device, as you don't need/want
> any of the platform device infrastructure here, you just wanted a device
> node and/or a way to show up in sysfs somewhere.
It was a platform device called efi_platform_loader and a single
attribute file in that device called capsule_load. I agree that if
we're going to use this for other things, we should probably have a uefi
directory somewhere (under firmware?) to collect everything together
rather than spraying random devices around.
> If you have some kind of "platform resource", then you can be a platform
> device, otherwise please don't use that api just because it seems simple
> to use. Use the ones the driver core provides for you that really are
> just as simple (i.e. device_create()).
OK, so this is what I'm trying to understand. Why isn't a pipe to
firmware for something a "platform resource"? I think UEFI is in the
same class as ACPI which uses platform devices all over.
James
--
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