On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:48:54AM +0100, Ian Abbott wrote: > On 2012-03-19 23:26, Greg KH wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 03:46:49PM -0700, Gerard Snitselaar wrote: > >>On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 09:43:25AM -0700, Gerard Snitselaar wrote: > >>>On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 09:31:03AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > >>>> > >>>>Ick, why is this loop even needed? We are only here if the pci device > >>>>is present in the system so this shouldn't be needed at all, right? > >>>> > >>>>Or is this a bit more complex than I am making it out to be? > >>>> > >>>>greg k-h > >>> > >>>Most likely not. I will take a look at some of the other drivers in > >>>comedi and see how the attach code looks there. I believe the code > >>>section in hpdi_attach() was written by the same person. Unfortunately > >>>I don't have a device to actually play around and see what changes are > >>>doing. > >>> > >> > >>I looked at this a bit more. It looks like they lose visibility to the > >>pci_dev structure. > >> > >>*_probe() > >> comedi_pci_auto_config() pci_dev > >> comedi_auto_config() pci_dev->dev > >> comedi_device_attach() ?? > >> driv->attach() ??<= iterate through pci devices. > >> > >>Most of the examples I have looked at so far use for_each_pci_dev() to > >>find the device, and s626 shortcuts it a bit by directly making calls > >>to pci_get_subsys() with specific ids. They all verify they have the > >>right device by checking the bus and slot that are grabbed from the > >>pci_dev in comedi_pci_auto_config() and passed down. > > > >Ugh, surely there's a way to keep the pci dev through the > >comedi_device_attach() call, right? > > comedi_device_attach() is also called for the COMEDI_DEVCONFIG ioctl > for "manually" configuring a comedi device, and that has no idea > about struct pci_dev, etc. > > I recently posted a series of patches that allows lower-level comedi > drivers to supply separate hooks for auto-configuring PCI devices or > USB devices without abusing the old "manual configuration" code > paths, see <http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-March/025331.html>. > > The old loop that searches the PCI bus is still needed for the > "manual configuration" code path. So, now that I've applied your patches, this patch isn't needed anymore, right? Or should it be reworked to use the new interfaces? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
