On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 03:54:25PM +0100, Marco Pagani wrote:
>
>
> On 2023-12-18 21:33, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 09:28:09PM +0100, Marco Pagani wrote:
> >> This patch tentatively set the owner field of fpga_manager_ops to
> >> THIS_MODULE for existing fpga manager low-level control modules.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Marco Pagani <marpagan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/fpga/altera-cvp.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/altera-pr-ip-core.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/altera-ps-spi.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/dfl-fme-mgr.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/ice40-spi.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/lattice-sysconfig.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/machxo2-spi.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/microchip-spi.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/socfpga-a10.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/socfpga.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/stratix10-soc.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/tests/fpga-mgr-test.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/tests/fpga-region-test.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/ts73xx-fpga.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/versal-fpga.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/xilinx-spi.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/zynq-fpga.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/fpga/zynqmp-fpga.c | 1 +
> >> 18 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/fpga/altera-cvp.c b/drivers/fpga/altera-cvp.c
> >> index 4ffb9da537d8..aeb913547dd8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/fpga/altera-cvp.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/fpga/altera-cvp.c
> >> @@ -520,6 +520,7 @@ static const struct fpga_manager_ops altera_cvp_ops = {
> >> .write_init = altera_cvp_write_init,
> >> .write = altera_cvp_write,
> >> .write_complete = altera_cvp_write_complete,
> >> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> >
> > Note, this is not how to do this, force the compiler to set this for you
> > automatically, otherwise everyone will always forget to do it. Look at
> > how functions like usb_register_driver() works.
> >
> > Also, are you _sure_ that you need a module owner in this structure? I
> > still don't know why...
> >
>
> Do you mean moving the module owner field to the manager context and setting
> it during registration with a helper macro?
I mean set it during registration with a helper macro.
> Something like:
>
> struct fpga_manager {
> ...
> struct module *owner;
> };
>
> #define fpga_mgr_register(parent, ...) \
> __fpga_mgr_register(parent,..., THIS_MODULE)
>
> struct fpga_manager *
> __fpga_mgr_register(struct device *parent, ..., struct module *owner)
> {
> ...
> mgr->owner = owner;
> }
Yes.
But again, is a module owner even needed? I don't think you all have
proven that yet...
thanks,
greg k-h
