pt., 8 maj 2020 o 07:54 Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx> napisał(a): > > On 08.05.2020 00:56, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Thu, 7 May 2020 19:03:44 +0200 Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > >>> To implement Edwin's suggestion? Makes sense, but I'm no expert, let's > >>> also CC Heiner since he was asking about it last time. > >> > >> Yes, because taking the last bit of priv_flags from net_device seems > >> to be more controversial but if net maintainers are fine with that I > >> can simply go with the current approach. > > > > From my perspective what Edwin suggests makes sense. Apart from > > little use for the bit after probe, it also seems cleaner for devres > > to be able to recognize managed objects based on its own state. > > > What I was saying is that we should catch the case that a driver > author uses a device-managed register() w/o doing the same for the > alloc(). A core function should not assume that driver authors do > sane things only. > I don't have a strong preference how it should be done. > Considering what is being discussed, have a look at get_pci_dr() and > find_pci_dr(), they deal with managing which parts of the PCI > subsystem are device-managed. Yes, I have - that's why I asked if anyone objects to me moving all networking devres functions into their own source file. The reason for that being: devres_find() needs to know the address of the release function, meanwhile devm_register_netdev() would have to go into net/core, while devm_alloc_etherdev() lives in net/ethernet. Bart
