On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 11:28 AM Ertman, David M <david.m.ertman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: [..] > > > Each auxiliary_device represents a part of its parent > > > +functionality. The generic behavior can be extended and specialized as > > needed > > > +by encapsulating an auxiliary_device within other domain-specific > > structures and > > > +the use of .ops callbacks. Devices on the auxiliary bus do not share any > > > +structures and the use of a communication channel with the parent is > > > +domain-specific. > > > > Should there be any guidance here on when to use ops and when to just > > export functions from parent driver to child. EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS() seems > > a perfect fit for publishing shared routines between parent and child. > > > > I would leave this up the driver writers to determine what is best for them. I think there is a pathological case that can be avoided with a statement like the following: "Note that ops are intended as a way to augment instance behavior within a class of auxiliary devices, it is not the mechanism for exporting common infrastructure from the parent. Consider EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS() to convey infrastructure from the parent module to the auxiliary module(s)." As for your other dispositions of the feedback, looks good to me.
