On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 09:36:58PM +0000, Kershner, David A wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@xxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 8:38 AM > > To: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Kershner, David A <David.Kershner@xxxxxxxxxx>; Sell, Timothy C > > <Timothy.Sell@xxxxxxxxxx>; Thompson, Bryan E. > > <bryan.thompson@xxxxxxxxxx>; jon.frisch@xxxxxxxxxx; Binder, David > > Anthony <David.Binder@xxxxxxxxxx>; *S-Par-Maintainer > > <SParMaintainer@xxxxxxxxxx>; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: unisys: visorbus: constify attribute_group > > structures. Why is this in your email body? > > > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 05:43:14PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote: > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > On Monday 17 July 2017 04:15 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 02:55:37PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote: > > > > > attribute_groups are not supposed to change at runtime. All functions > > > > > working with attribute_groups provided by <linux/sysfs.h> work > > > > > with const attribute_group. So mark the non-const structs as const. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorbus_main.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > drivers/staging/unisys/visorbus/visorchipset.c | 2 +- > > > > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > Why not just use the ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS() macro for these? Or is there > > > > something that is preventing that? > > > Yes, we can use. if we are only initializing '.attrs'. > > > ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS() will not work if we will initialize other member of > > > attribute_group like 'bin_attrs', 'is_visible', and 'name'. > > > > That means you should redo this patch :) > > > > Also, your changelog text had a typo, it is "attribute_group", not > > "attribute_groups". > > > > Greg, are you recommending that we shouldn't be setting the attribute_group > .name field? What does it pick up if we don't specify it? Why do you want a name for your group? Anyway, yes, you are right, if you set a .name, then you can't use the macro, my fault, I hadn't looked at it in a long time. > Also, for our attribute_groups in visorchipset, we are defining it with two > different attribute_group variables. Are you allowed to use two different > attribute_group variables in an attribute_groups, or is this frowned upon and > we should flatten it out to just one? An example that we used in the kernel was: > > static const struct attribute_group *l2_cache_pmu_attr_grps[] = { > &l2_cache_pmu_format_group, > &l2_cache_pmu_cpumask_group, > NULL, > }; Nah, that's fine, sorry for the noise. But the changelog text still should be fixed so I can take this. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
