Hi Andrew, > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Rybchenko <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, July 5, 2021 5:19 PM > To: Xueming(Steven) Li <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Wang Haiyue <[email protected]>; NBU-Contact-Thomas > Monjalon <[email protected]>; Kinsella Ray > <[email protected]>; Parav Pandit <[email protected]>; Neil Horman > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] bus/auxiliary: introduce auxiliary bus > > On 7/5/21 9:45 AM, Xueming Li wrote: > > Auxiliary bus [1] provides a way to split function into child-devices > > representing sub-domains of functionality. Each auxiliary device > > represents a part of its parent functionality. > > > > Auxiliary device is identified by unique device name, sysfs path: > > /sys/bus/auxiliary/devices/<name> > > > > Devargs legacy syntax of auxiliary device: > > -a auxiliary:<name>[,args...] > > Devargs generic syntax of auxiliary device: > > -a bus=auxiliary,name=<name>/class=<class>/driver=<driver>[,args...] > > > > [1] kernel auxiliary bus document: > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/driver-api/auxiliary_bus.html > > > > Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <[email protected]> > > Cc: Wang Haiyue <[email protected]> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> > > Cc: Kinsella Ray <[email protected]> > > Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <[email protected]> > > I still don't understand if we really need to make the API a part of stable > API/ABI in the future. Can it be internal?
There was some discussion on this with Thomas in earlier version. Users might want to register/unregister their own PMD driver, Is this a valid scenario?
