Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1260790 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] usb/gadget: independent registration of gadgets and gadget drivers

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] usb/gadget: independent registration of gadgets  and gadget drivers Ruslan Bilovol <ruslan.bilovol@gmail.com> - 2015-11-02 17:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] usb/gadget: independent registration of gadgets  and gadget drivers Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> - 2015-11-09 01:10 +0100

#1260790 — Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] usb/gadget: independent registration of gadgets and gadget drivers

Hi Maxime,

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 01:01:09AM +0300, Ruslan Bilovol wrote:
>> This patchset adds independent registration of gadgets
>> and gadget drivers to udc-core. This is very useful for
>> built-in modules into kernel case since it's possible
>> situation that gadget driver is probing at a time
>> when no gadgets are registered in udc-core.
>> In this case instead of silently failing without
>> of any attempt to recover, with independent registration
>> of gadgets and gadget drivers there is no matter
>> in which order gadgets and gadget drivers are
>> probed/registered.
>>
>> This patch has side-effect on gadget drivers that had
>> __init/__exit attributes on some paths like bind/unbind
>> and (since bind/unbind may happen at any time) should
>> not use them now. This is covered by forth patch
>>
>
> Has there been any progress on these patches? They're fixing some real
> issue that we're seeing, and it seems to both work quite well and not
> generate a lot of pushback.

This patch series has stack on review due to different views
on checking input parameters of externally visible function.

I see there is no any way to get these patches accepted other
than skip checking validity of some input parameters as
was pointed by Alan, although I disagree with it.

I will post updated patch series later

Best regards,
Ruslan


>
> Thanks!
> Maxime
>
> --
> Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
> http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1265254

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Ruslan,

On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 06:44:00PM +0200, Ruslan Bilovol wrote:
> >> This patchset adds independent registration of gadgets
> >> and gadget drivers to udc-core. This is very useful for
> >> built-in modules into kernel case since it's possible
> >> situation that gadget driver is probing at a time
> >> when no gadgets are registered in udc-core.
> >> In this case instead of silently failing without
> >> of any attempt to recover, with independent registration
> >> of gadgets and gadget drivers there is no matter
> >> in which order gadgets and gadget drivers are
> >> probed/registered.
> >>
> >> This patch has side-effect on gadget drivers that had
> >> __init/__exit attributes on some paths like bind/unbind
> >> and (since bind/unbind may happen at any time) should
> >> not use them now. This is covered by forth patch
> >>
> >
> > Has there been any progress on these patches? They're fixing some real
> > issue that we're seeing, and it seems to both work quite well and not
> > generate a lot of pushback.
> 
> This patch series has stack on review due to different views
> on checking input parameters of externally visible function.
> 
> I see there is no any way to get these patches accepted other
> than skip checking validity of some input parameters as
> was pointed by Alan, although I disagree with it.
> 
> I will post updated patch series later

Great, thanks a lot!

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web