On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 01:41:34PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 09:27:16AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 10:56:51AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > > I know that I have done a rubbish review. I'm going to have to review > > > > this properly later. > > > main thing i wanted to know is if my approach is correct. since nothing > > > on that so I hope I am on the correct track. Thanks. > > > I will send in the next version in a day or two. > > > > At quick glance, you are on the right track. Writing a new bus is hard, > > I know, the documentation is lacking and it's tricky in places and the > > api is horrid in others. I know this, just never had the time to make > > it easier, so if you have any questions about it, please let me know. > well, as of now one question. I am planning like this : > > sys > _______________|_____________ > | | | | | > bus > ________|______ > | > parport > _______|_____ > | | > devices drivers- lp, ppdev, panel etc.. > _____|________ > | | > parport0 parport1 > > > I can understand that drivers need to be binded to one device, so > suppose ppdev wants to use parport0, how that binding will be done?
The driver core does the "binding". > do i need mark the driver in the parport->ddev.driver ? No, just have the probe function for the ppdev function return 0, meaning it successfully bound to the driver that was passed to it and all will be fine. > I think that should have been automatically done if i have a probe > function for the bus... Yes. > somehow I am missing this step in the other drivers codes. Hope this helps, 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/
