On 4/19/21 10:50 PM, Zev Weiss wrote: [ ... ] > I had a glance at the enclosure driver; it looks pretty geared toward > SES-like things (drivers/scsi/ses.c being its only usage I can see in the > kernel at the moment) and while it could perhaps be pressed into working for > this it seems like it would probably drag in a fair amount of boilerplate and > result in a somewhat gratuitously confusing driver arrangement (calling the > things involved in the cases we're looking at "enclosures" seems like a bit > of a stretch). > > As an alternative, would something like the patch below be more along the > lines of what you're suggesting? And if so, would it make sense to > generalize it into something like 'pmbus-switch.c' and add a > PMBUS_HAVE_POWERSWITCH functionality bit or similar in the pmbus code instead > of hardcoding it for only LM25066 support? > >
No. Don't access pmbus functions from outside drivers/hwmon/pmbus. I used to be opposed to function export restrictions (aka export namespaces), but you are making a good case that we need to introduce them for pmbus functions. Guenter
