[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YbCNhAtiueFZ/hkJ@unreal>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2021 12:48:36 +0200
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>, lee.jones@...aro.org,
hdegoede@...hat.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
srinivas.pandruvada@...el.com, shuah@...nel.org,
mgross@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [V2 2/6] driver core: auxiliary bus: Add driver data helpers
On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 12:14:41PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 11:12:20AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 09:43:37AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > The idea that you have two APIs which do the same thing, one is
> > obfuscated version of another.
> >
> > If you don't want from people to use driver core function and structures,
> > you shouldn't expose them in global headers.
>
> For all these APIs the rationale is very simple. If you have callback that
> takes a pointer to the container (*), you better use the APIs related to
> this container (no need to have an explicit dereferencing). Otherwise you
> use dev_*() APIs (when it's pointer to the pure struct device).
>
> The value is to have coherent APIs around struct device containers.
>
> *) under container here I assume the data structure that has the embedded
> struct device in it.
Thanks
>
--
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists