Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1356870
| From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux |
| Date | 2016-03-14 04:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rcrmF-6zS-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rakIG-6lY-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <rakIH-6lY-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <rbiOu-6er-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <rcpbc-51v-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 09:09:22AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> On 03/11/2016 08:06 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 03:53:44PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> >> +struct intel_mux_dev {
> >> + struct device *dev;
> >> + char *extcon_name;
> >> + char *cable_name;
> >> + int (*cable_set_cb)(struct intel_mux_dev *mux);
> >> + int (*cable_unset_cb)(struct intel_mux_dev *mux);
> >> +};
> > This is a device, why not make it one? Don't just hold a reference.
> > And do you really even hold that reference?
>
> It's not a device. It's just an encapsulation for parameters passed into
> intel_usb_mux_register().
But you called it a device, so you can understand my confusion.
And why not make it a device? Why isn't this one? Hint, I really think
it should be...
> >> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL_USB_MUX)
> >> +extern int intel_usb_mux_register(struct intel_mux_dev *mux);
> >> +extern int intel_usb_mux_unregister(struct device *dev);
> > It's obvious you didn't run this through checkpatch.pl, please do so...
>
> I did, but didn't hit any errors or warnings.
Odd, don't put extern in .h files for functions, I thought checkpatch
catches that...
Try it with --strict, as you should with all new code you submit.
> > And your api is horrid, think about what you want the "core" to do here,
> > it should be the one creating the device and returning it to the caller,
> > not forcing the caller to somehow create it first and then pass it in.
>
> This isn't a layer or core. It doesn't create any new devices. It's actually
> some shared code which can be used by all Intel dual role port drivers.
It should be a device, as you are treating it like one :)
> I put it in a separated file because 1) this can avoid duplication; 2) this code
> could be used for any architectures as long as a USB port is shared by
> two components and it needs an OS response when event triggers.
It's a bit hard for other arches to be using something called "intel_"
:(
> I guess intel_usb_mux_register/unregister() is a bit misleading. How about
> changing them to intel_usb_mux_probe/remove()?
You are going to probe/remove something that isn't a device? Come on
now...
> > And why is it not symmetrical, you are passing one thing into register
> > and another into unregister.
>
> struct intel_mux_dev is an encapsulation for parameters passed into
> intel_usb_mux_register().
Which is a device.
> It's not a new device structure though the name
> is a bit misleading.
Yes it is, hint, you want it to be a device.
> How about remove this structure and put these in function parameters?
How about making it a real device? :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-08 09:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com> - 2016-03-10 13:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-03-11 01:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-11 01:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-03-11 01:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-14 02:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-03-14 04:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] usb: mux: add common code for Intel dual role port mux Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-14 08:40 +0100
csiph-web