On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:50:05PM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 05:27:51PM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:38:57PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 07:02:44AM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/eeprom.c | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/fwio.c | 5 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/led.c | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/main.c | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54.h | 3 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54pci.c | 26 ++++++----
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54pci.h | 4 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54spi.c | 80
> > > > +++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54spi.h | 2 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54usb.c | 18 +++----
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54usb.h | 4 +-
> > > > drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/txrx.c | 2 +-
> > > > 12 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > why does the "new" api require more lines?
> >
> > This is a bare bones flexible API with only a few new tiny features to start
> > with, one of them was to enable the API do the freeing of the driver data
> > for
> > you. In the kernel we have devres to help with this but devres only helps if
> > you would use the API call on probe. We want to support the ability to let
> > the
> > API free the driver data for you even if your call is outside of probe, for
> > this
> > to work we need a callback. For async calls this is rather trivial given we
> > already have a callback, for sync calls this means a new routine is needed.
> > Freeing the data for you is an option, but I decided to keep the callback
> > requirement even if you didn't want the free'ing to be done for you. The
> > addition of a callback is what accounts for the slight increase on this
> > driver.
> >
> > I could try avoiding the callback if no freeing is needed.
>
> OK I've added a respective helper call which would map 1-1 with the
> old sync mechanism to enable a 1-1 change, this will be called
> driver_data_request_simple(), but let me know if there is a preference
> for something else.
>
> With this the only visible delta now is from taking advantage of new
> features. In p54's case this would re-organize the mess in
> drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54spi.c, the diff stat is a bit
> larger for that file just because of this but I think in this case
> its very much worth the small additions. In this case two routines are
> added for handling the work through callbacks on a sync call.
>
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
I agree with Linus, as well as, look, it's still bigger, so you are
making driver developers do more work :(
> /* FIXME: should driver use it's own struct device? */
> - ret = request_firmware(&priv->firmware, "3826.arm", &priv->spi->dev);
> -
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(&priv->spi->dev, "request_firmware() failed: %d", ret);
> + ret = driver_data_request_simple("3826.arm", &priv->spi->dev,
> + &priv->firmware);
> + if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
> - }
Hm, a FIXME that you aren't fixing :(
I still fail to see why this new api is worth it at all, sorry.
greg k-h
