[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220905100101.343861-1-jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:01:01 +0800
From: Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@...as.ac.cn>
To: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc: johan@...nel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@...as.ac.cn>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v3] USB: serial: ftdi_sio: Convert to use dev_groups
On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 10:52:52PM +0800, Greg KH wrote:
>>>> drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c b/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c
>>>> index d5a3986dfee7..479c3a5caaf8 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/serial/ftdi_sio.c
>>>> @@ -1107,11 +1107,40 @@ static u32 ftdi_232bm_baud_base_to_divisor(int baud, int base);
>>>> static u32 ftdi_232bm_baud_to_divisor(int baud);
>>>> static u32 ftdi_2232h_baud_base_to_divisor(int baud, int base);
>>>> static u32 ftdi_2232h_baud_to_divisor(int baud);
>>>> +static umode_t ftdi_sio_attr_is_visible(struct kobject *kobj,
>>>> + struct attribute *attr, int idx);
>>>> +static ssize_t latency_timer_store(struct device *dev,
>>>> + struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>> + const char *valbuf, size_t count);
>>>> +static ssize_t event_char_store(struct device *dev,
>>>> + struct device_attribute *attr, const char *valbuf, size_t count);
>>>> +static ssize_t latency_timer_show(struct device *dev,
>>>> + struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf);
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Please work with the code so that you do not have to pre-define these
>>> functions. It should be possible. Worst case, you pre-define the
>>> structure for the driver, that should be it.
>>
>> Without pre-definition of the functions, compilation errors will occur,
>> such as 'ftdi_sio_attr_is_visible' undeclared here.
>> I have no idea why they are not necessary.
>
> If you move the code around that asks for those functions, you will not
> need to define them.
>
Fine, I have already revised the patch and submitted a v4.
>>> And again, have you tested this change?
>>
>> Every time I change the code, I recomplie it and check whether there are
>> errors.
>> Are there any other tests I need to do?
>
> Yes, boot with the device and make sure that the sysfs files are still
> there. You do have access to one of these devices, right? They are
> very very common.
Sorry, I still have no idea how to boot with the device.
But if there is any wrong with the patch, you can tell me and I will continue
to revise it.
Thanks,
Jiang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists