linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5 09/17] soundwire: intel: remove platform devices and use 'Master Devices' instead

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: <20200118071257.GY2818@vkoul-mobl>
Date:   Sat, 18 Jan 2020 12:42:57 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tiwai@...e.de, broonie@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        jank@...ence.com, srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
        slawomir.blauciak@...el.com,
        Bard liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rander Wang <rander.wang@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5 09/17] soundwire: intel: remove platform
 devices and use 'Master Devices' instead

On 14-01-20, 10:01, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
> > I am quoting the code in patch, which i pointed in my first reply!
> > 
> > On 17-12-19, 15:03, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c b/drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c
> > > index 4b769409f6f8..42f7ae034bea 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c
> > 
> > This is intel specific file...
> > 
> > > +++ b/drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c
> > 
> > snip ...
> > 
> > > +static struct sdw_intel_ctx
> > > +*sdw_intel_probe_controller(struct sdw_intel_res *res)
> > 
> > this is intel driver, intel function!
> > 
> > > -
> > > -		link->pdev = pdev;
> > > -		link++;
> > > +		/* let the SoundWire master driver to its probe */
> > > +		md->driver->probe(md, link);
> >                              ^^^^^^
> > which does this... calls a probe()!
> > 
> > And my first reply was:
> > 
> > > > +             /* let the SoundWire master driver to its probe */
> > > > +             md->driver->probe(md, link);
> > > 
> > > So you are invoking driver probe here.. That is typically role of driver
> > > core to do that.. If we need that, make driver core do that for you!
> > 
> > I rest my case!
> 
> I think you are too focused on the probe case and not realizing the
> extensions suggested by this patchset. A "driver" is not limited to 'probe'
> and 'remove' cases.
> 
> As mentioned since mid-September, there is a need for an initialization of
> software/kernel structures (which I called probe but should have been called
> init really), and a second step where the hardware is actually configured -

I find it amusing that a person whom i admired for strict use of terms
can get this differently!

A rename away from probe will certainly be very helpful as
you would also agree that terms 'probe' and 'remove' have a very
special meaning in kernel, so let us avoid these

-- 
~Vinod