On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 09:57:14PM +0800, Jiang Liu wrote: > From: Jiang Liu <jiang....@huawei.com> > > There are several requirements to temporarily reject device driver > binding. Possible usage cases as below: > 1) We should avoid binding an unsafe driver to a device belonging to > an active VFIO group, otherwise it will break the DMA isolation > property of VFIO. > 2) When hot-removing a PCI hierachy, we should avoid binding device > drivers to PCI devices going to be removed during the window > between unbinding of device driver and destroying of device nodes. > 3) When hot-adding a PCI host bridge, we should temporarily disable > driver binding before setting up corresponding IOMMU and IOAPIC. > > We may add a flag into struct device to temporarily disable driver > binding as in this thread https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1535721/.
I totally do not understand. The bus controls this, if it does not want to bind a device to a driver, then don't do it. It's really quite simple to just block the probe callback the bus gets, right? Why create all of this extra, and confusing, interface instead? > This patch proposes another solution to temporarily disable driver > binding by using bus notification mechanisms. It adds an notification > event to solicit if anybody has objections when binding a driver to a > device. Sorry, but no, don't do this, it's way more confusing. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
