Re: [PATCH v20 2/5] driver core: Export device_is_bound()

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 7:36 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 07:25:04AM -0800, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 08:45:24AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 11:29:18PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 12:43:42PM -0800, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > > > > Export device_is_bound() to enable its use by drivers that are
> > > > > built as modules.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Didn't Greg clearly NAK this the last few times it came up?
> > >
> > > Yes, which is why this series is _WAY_ on the bottom of my list for
> > > reviews...
> >
> > I wasn't aware of that prior discussion, it would have helped to know
> > that this is a major concern for you ...
>
> Sorry, that was on a different thread for a different feature, I thought
> it was this one.  Too many reviews at times.
>
> >
> > If using device_is_bound() is a no-go then _find_onboard_hub() of
> > the onboard_hub driver could make it's decision based on the
> > presence (or absence) of drvdata, which is what the function ultimately
> > returns.
>
> That suffers from the same problem.  I'll take a look at this later
> after -rc1 is out and see what can be done here...

Did you have any suggestions or pointers to places to further research
what you're looking for? I think at this point both Stephen Boyd and I
have given the patch series a fairly thorough review. If the only
problem left is the export of device_is_bound() then we should find a
better solution to the problem so the series can move forward.

Thanks!

-Doug