On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 3:05 PM, David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> There's really no need for the drm core to keep a list of all >> devices of a given driver - the linux device model keeps perfect >> track of this already for us. >> >> The exception is old legacy ums drivers using pci shadow attaching. >> So rename the lists to make the use case clearer and rip out everything >> else. >> >> v2: Rebase on top of David Herrmann's drm device register changes. >> Also drop the bogus dev_set_drvdata for platform drivers that somehow >> crept into the original version - drivers really should be in full >> control of that field. > > You didn't really change any dev_set_drvdata, did you? And I guess you > mean pci_set_drvdata()? I had to keep it in place in drm_pci.c as it > has been there before my device-registration changes. However, with > your series you added the pci_set_drvdata() everywhere yourself, so > yes, please remove it. That was a bogus hunk in v1 of this patch, which iirc I've never posted onto the list anywhere. I added a platfrom_set_drvdata call, but with the previous series to make sure that each driver has that it's a bit redundant. Long term, when we split up the drm init code I think the drvdata assignment should be the driver's job. I'll fix the fumble with the list_head init, thanks for spotting that. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
