On 3/24/21 10:36 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 09:55:01AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
Note at this point it would mean an API change and impact the existing
Nvidia/Mellanox code, we are using the same sequence as them
THere is no "stable api" in the kernel, so if
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 09:55:01AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> Note at this point it would mean an API change and impact the existing
> Nvidia/Mellanox code, we are using the same sequence as them
THere is no "stable api" in the kernel, so if something has to change,
that's fine, we can
On 3/24/21 5:50 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
On 23-03-21, 12:29, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
Thanks Greg and Vinod for the reviews
-static int intel_master_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static int intel_link_probe(struct auxiliary_device *auxdev, const struct
auxiliary_device_id *id)
{
Note that the auxiliary bus API has separate init and add steps, which
requires more attention in the error unwinding paths. The main loop
needs to deal with kfree() and auxiliary_device_uninit() for the
current iteration before jumping to the common label which releases
everything allocated
On 23-03-21, 12:29, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> Thanks Greg and Vinod for the reviews
>
> > > > -static int intel_master_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > > +static int intel_link_probe(struct auxiliary_device *auxdev, const
> > > > struct auxiliary_device_id *id)
> > > > {
> > > > -
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 02:14:18PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
>
> On 3/23/21 1:32 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 01:04:49PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Note that the auxiliary bus API has separate init and add steps, which
> > > > > requires more
On 3/23/21 1:32 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 01:04:49PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
Note that the auxiliary bus API has separate init and add steps, which
requires more attention in the error unwinding paths. The main loop
needs to deal with kfree() and
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 01:04:49PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
> > > Note that the auxiliary bus API has separate init and add steps, which
> > > requires more attention in the error unwinding paths. The main loop
> > > needs to deal with kfree() and auxiliary_device_uninit() for the
> >
Note that the auxiliary bus API has separate init and add steps, which
requires more attention in the error unwinding paths. The main loop
needs to deal with kfree() and auxiliary_device_uninit() for the
current iteration before jumping to the common label which releases
everything allocated
Thanks Greg and Vinod for the reviews
-static int intel_master_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static int intel_link_probe(struct auxiliary_device *auxdev, const struct
auxiliary_device_id *id)
{
- struct device *dev = >dev;
+ struct device *dev = >dev;
+ struct
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 12:18:46PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 23-03-21, 08:43, Bard Liao wrote:
> > From: Pierre-Louis Bossart
> >
> > Now that the auxiliary_bus exists, there's no reason to use platform
> > devices as children of a PCI device any longer.
> >
> > This patch refactors the
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 08:43:25AM +0800, Bard Liao wrote:
> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart
>
> Now that the auxiliary_bus exists, there's no reason to use platform
> devices as children of a PCI device any longer.
>
> This patch refactors the code by extending a basic auxiliary device
> with Intel
On 23-03-21, 08:43, Bard Liao wrote:
> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart
>
> Now that the auxiliary_bus exists, there's no reason to use platform
> devices as children of a PCI device any longer.
>
> This patch refactors the code by extending a basic auxiliary device
> with Intel link-specific
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart
Now that the auxiliary_bus exists, there's no reason to use platform
devices as children of a PCI device any longer.
This patch refactors the code by extending a basic auxiliary device
with Intel link-specific structures that need to be passed between
controller and
14 matches
Mail list logo
