On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 09:17:02AM +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: > On 09/04/2013 12:57 AM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 10:13:44AM +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: > >> Hi Greg, > >> > >> On 09/02/2013 09:40 AM, Greg KH wrote: > >>> On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 09:20:08AM +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: > >>>> This patch remove extcon_dev_register()'s second parameter which means > >>>> the pointer of parent device to simplify prototype of this function. > >>> > >>> No, please don't. You want the parent to be passed in, as the core > >>> needs it when it is registered with the system, otherwise it will not > >>> show up in sysfs properly (i.e. you can't set it afterwards.) > >> > >> Currently, each extcon driver have allocated memory for extcon device > >> by using devm_kzalloc() in each extcon device driver. > > > > That seems backwards, the extcon core should be the one doing the > > allocation, and ownership of the device, like all other subsystem cores > > do. That makes the driver logic much simpler, and the lifetime > > ownership correct (i.e. what happens when a device is unbound from a > > driver by userspace? The driver can't control the device memory > > anymore...) > > > > OK, > The extcon core will control memory allocation instead of extcon device driver > as following. > - devm_extcon_allocate_device(struct device *dev)
Huh? Why do you need a devm allocator? This is a "real" child device, just create it with a "extcon_create_device()" or some such call, like all other busses do? thanks, 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/
