śr., 6 maj 2020 o 19:12 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
>
> On Wed, 6 May 2020 08:39:47 +0200 Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > wt., 5 maj 2020 o 19:31 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
> > >
> > > On Tue, 5 May 2020 16:02:25 +0200 Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Provide devm_register_netdev() - a device resource managed variant
> > > > of register_netdev(). This new helper will only work for net_device
> > > > structs that have a parent device assigned and are devres managed too.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> > > > index 522288177bbd..99db537c9468 100644
> > > > --- a/net/core/dev.c
> > > > +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> > > > @@ -9519,6 +9519,54 @@ int register_netdev(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > }
> > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(register_netdev);
> > > >
> > > > +struct netdevice_devres {
> > > > + struct net_device *ndev;
> > > > +};
> > >
> > > Is there really a need to define a structure if we only need a pointer?
> > >
> >
> > There is no need for that, but it really is more readable this way.
> > Also: using a pointer directly doesn't save us any memory nor code
> > here.
>
> I don't care either way but devm_alloc_etherdev_mqs() and co. are using
> the double pointer directly. Please make things consistent. Either do
> the same, or define the structure in some header and convert other
> helpers to also make use of it.
In order to use devres_find() to check if struct net_device is managed
in devm_register_netdev() I need to know the address of the release
function used by devm_alloc_etherdev_mqs(). Do you mind if I move all
networking devres routines (currently only devm_alloc_etherdev_mqs())
into a separate .c file (e.g. under net/devres.c)?
Bart
