RE: [PATCH v4 05/14] platform/x86: dell-wmi-descriptor: split WMI descriptor into it's own driver

From: Mario.Limonciello
Date: Thu Oct 05 2017 - 13:04:35 EST


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Shevchenko [mailto:andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 12:34 AM
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario_Limonciello@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: dvhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Platform Driver
> <platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> quasisec@xxxxxxxxxx; Pali RohÃr <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx>; Rafael J. Wysocki
> <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; mjg59@xxxxxxxxxx; Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>;
> Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/14] platform/x86: dell-wmi-descriptor: split WMI
> descriptor into it's own driver
>
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Mario Limonciello
> <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > All communication on individual GUIDs should occur in separate drivers.
> > Allowing a driver to communicate with the bus to another GUID is just
> > a hack that discourages drivers to adopt the bus model.
> >
> > The information found from the WMI descriptor driver is now exported
> > for use by other drivers.
>
> > + priv = list_first_entry_or_null(&wmi_list,
> > + struct descriptor_priv,
> > + list);
>
> > + priv = list_first_entry_or_null(&wmi_list,
> > + struct descriptor_priv,
> > + list);
>
> static inline ...to_priv(...)
> {
> return list_first_entry_...();
> }
>
> > + list_add_tail(&priv->list, &wmi_list);
>
> > + list_del(&priv->list);
>
> Do these need locking?

Yeah this seems like a good idea. I'll add it in.

>
> > +bool dell_wmi_get_interface_version(u32 *version);
> > +bool dell_wmi_get_size(u32 *size);
>
> This might need stubs when module is not selected (when functionality
> is optional if it would be the case), otherwise all users should
> select it explicitly.

Per Darren's other threads I'm adjusting Kconfig to make sure this module
is selected. It's realistically not optional when using these others.