From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC2F6C49ED7 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 22:26:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BC7F20640 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 22:26:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1568931970; bh=xWK/p2ELdly/XdoxpRa2+V9wlIdhFi5y4+R1CLo6gIo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=cEiDSRqsWEX1mHdSWATqULjb19S67v+OhEOne6mlCKJ5f1ph0U3PcjTe43F0Yvo1E UHYFaH8UzCgMz7laeeTpsmV/iJatuJ0HkuzWcYv9AAlVwmdxl7EqQudam3WmQBtXon wVCgyOIkf3u4sZgBJytRT40U73LhEK/ZjnD9qR+M= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2405616AbfISW0J (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:26:09 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42386 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393783AbfISW0G (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:26:06 -0400 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 719BE2054F; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 22:26:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1568931964; bh=xWK/p2ELdly/XdoxpRa2+V9wlIdhFi5y4+R1CLo6gIo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=nH5xK9iO61ryVh8gRTwR8fQL7VN3XIQ3ImjJClMlQpIVnYnBBZ0wPhabZeHMvWd3I +nTjNrftcOCktbQ6oKYOeQGNebcDxQsHfJCKB4nR5mXyTxTRiFX1Vm/0wkrjq1nXyx FynRNttAzjNK4wxB2Yy82+1x4LKMZ6BgJKL+Q7SA= Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 00:25:25 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Murali Nalajala , rafael@kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Walleij Subject: Re: [PATCH] base: soc: Export soc_device_to_device API Message-ID: <20190919222525.GA445429@kroah.com> References: <1568927624-13682-1-git-send-email-mnalajal@codeaurora.org> <20190919213203.GA395325@kroah.com> <20190919215300.GC1418@minitux> <20190919215836.GA426988@kroah.com> <20190919221456.GA63675@minitux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190919221456.GA63675@minitux> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 03:14:56PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Thu 19 Sep 14:58 PDT 2019, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 02:53:00PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > > On Thu 19 Sep 14:32 PDT 2019, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 02:13:44PM -0700, Murali Nalajala wrote: > > > > > If the soc drivers want to add custom sysfs entries it needs to > > > > > access "dev" field in "struct soc_device". This can be achieved > > > > > by "soc_device_to_device" API. Soc drivers which are built as a > > > > > module they need above API to be exported. Otherwise one can > > > > > observe compilation issues. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Murali Nalajala > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/base/soc.c | 1 + > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/soc.c b/drivers/base/soc.c > > > > > index 7c0c5ca..4ad52f6 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/base/soc.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/base/soc.c > > > > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ struct device *soc_device_to_device(struct soc_device *soc_dev) > > > > > { > > > > > return &soc_dev->dev; > > > > > } > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(soc_device_to_device); > > > > > > > > > > static umode_t soc_attribute_mode(struct kobject *kobj, > > > > > struct attribute *attr, > > > > > > > > What in-kernel driver needs this? > > > > > > > > > > Half of the drivers interacting with the soc driver calls this API, > > > several of these I see no reason for being builtin (e.g. > > > ux500 andversatile). So I think this patch makes sense to allow us to > > > build these as modules. > > > > > > > Is linux-next breaking without this? > > > > > > > > > > No, we postponed the addition of any sysfs attributes in the Qualcomm > > > socinfo driver. > > > > > > > We don't export things unless we have a user of the export. > > > > > > > > Also, adding "custom" sysfs attributes is almost always not the correct > > > > thing to do at all. The driver should be doing it, by setting up the > > > > attribute group properly so that the driver core can do it automatically > > > > for it. > > > > > > > > No driver should be doing individual add/remove of sysfs files. If it > > > > does so, it is almost guaranteed to be doing it incorrectly and racing > > > > userspace. > > > > > > > > > > The problem here is that the attributes are expected to be attached to > > > the soc driver, which is separate from the platform-specific drivers. So > > > there's no way to do platform specific attributes the right way. > > > > > > > And yes, there's loads of in-kernel examples of doing this wrong, I've > > > > been working on fixing that up, look at the patches now in Linus's tree > > > > for platform and USB drivers that do this as examples of how to do it > > > > right. > > > > > > > > > > Agreed, this patch should not be used as an approval for any crazy > > > attributes; but it's necessary in order to extend the soc device's > > > attributes, per the current design. > > > > Wait, no, let's not let the "current design" remain if it is broken! > > > > Why can't the soc driver handle the attributes properly so that the > > individual driver doesn't have to do the create/remove? > > > > The custom attributes that these drivers want to add to the common ones > are known in advance, so I presume we could have them passed into > soc_device_register() and registered together with the common > attributes... > > It sounds like it's worth a prototype. Do you have an in-kernel example I can look at to get an idea of what is needed here? thanks, greg k-h