On 16-06-21, 12:27, Sanjay R Mehta wrote:
>
>
> On 6/16/2021 11:46 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > [CAUTION: External Email]
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 10:24:52AM +0530, Sanjay R Mehta wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/16/2021 9:45 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> >>> [CAUTION: External Email]
> >>>
> >>> On 15-06-21, 16:50, Sanjay R Mehta wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>> +static struct pt_device *pt_alloc_struct(struct device *dev)
> >>>>>> +{
> >>>>>> + struct pt_device *pt;
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> + pt = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pt), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> + if (!pt)
> >>>>>> + return NULL;
> >>>>>> + pt->dev = dev;
> >>>>>> + pt->ord = atomic_inc_return(&pt_ordinal);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What is the use of this number?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> There are eight similar instances of this DMA engine on AMD SOC.
> >>>> It is to differentiate each of these instances.
> >>>
> >>> Are they individual device objects?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes, they are individual device objects.
> >
> > Then what is "ord" for? Why are you using an atomic variable for this?
> > What does this field do? Why doesn't the normal way of naming a device
> > come into play here instead?
> >
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> The value of "ord" is incremented for each device instance and then it
> is used to store different name for each device as shown in below snippet.
>
> pt->ord = atomic_inc_return(&pt_ordinal);
> snprintf(pt->name, MAX_PT_NAME_LEN, "pt-%u", pt->ord);
Okay why not use device->name ?
Trying to unroll further, who creates pt_device? who creates the dev
object under this..?
Thanks
--
~Vinod
