I think the main reason to put it here is that most of the drivers are@@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ struct fwnode_handle;My impression is that this would be better suited to "struct device_driver",
* will never get called until they do.
* @remove: Called when a device removed from this bus.
but I assume that there is a good reason to add to "struct bus_type".
happy with the getter on bus level and don't need special treatment. We
don't have to touch all the drivers to hookup a common getter, nor do we
have to install a default handler when the driver doesn't specify one.
Having the callback in struct bus_driver avoids this. Though Christoph
suggested it, so I can only guess.
But you bring up a good point, if we had also an irq_get_affinity
callback in struct device_driver it would be possible for the
hisi_sas v2 driver to provide a getter and blk_mq_hctx_map_queues could
do:
for (queue = 0; queue < qmap->nr_queues; queue++) {
if (dev->driver->irq_get_affinity)
mask = dev->driver->irq_get_affinity;
else if (dev->bus->irq_get_affinity)
mask = dev->bus->irq_get_affinity(dev, queue + offset);
if (!mask)
goto fallback;
for_each_cpu(cpu, mask)
qmap->mq_map[cpu] = qmap->queue_offset + queue;
}
and with this in place the open coded version in hisi_sas v2 can also be
replaced.
If no one objects, I go ahead and add the callback to struct
device_driver.