On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 02:01:59PM +0530, sourab gupta wrote: > On Thu, 2016-12-01 at 00:07 -0800, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 12:32:31PM +0530, swati.dhin...@intel.com wrote: > > > +int drmfs_init(void) > > > +{ > > > + int retval; > > > + > > > + retval = sysfs_create_mount_point(kernel_kobj, "drm"); > > > + if (retval) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + retval = register_filesystem(&drm_fs_type); > > > + if (!retval) > > > + drmfs_registered = true; > > > + > > > + return retval; > > > +} > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drmfs_init); > > > + > > > +int drmfs_fini(void) > > > +{ > > > + int retval; > > > + > > > + retval = unregister_filesystem(&drm_fs_type); > > > + if (retval) > > > + return retval; > > > + > > > + drmfs_registered = false; > > > + > > > + sysfs_remove_mount_point(kernel_kobj, "drm"); > > > +} > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drmfs_fini); > > > > This needs to act like a singleton for multiple DRM drivers, i.e. > > add a mutex and use drmfs_registered as a reference count (also then > > don't call the entrypoint init/fini). Or alternatively (and probably > > better?), simply do init/fini from the DRM module init. > > -Chris > > > Hi Chris, > > In the second patch, drmfs_init is called by drm_core_init, which should > thus be called only once (i.e. during drm module init), and likewise for > drmfs_fini which is called during drm_core_exit. > Am I missing something here?
Nope, that was me missing the change from driver registration to core between chunks. The only thing missing here then are the __init, __exit markers, and to make it perfectly clear that this is a distinct phase move the calls to init/exit into their own patch. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx