On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 11:58:18AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 11:24 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 10:16:10AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 9:55 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 09:45:41AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 9:34 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 09:18:30AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > > > CC Greg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 11:30 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Export the symbol for device_is_bound() so that we can use it in gpio-sim > > > > > > > > to check if the simulated GPIO chip is bound before fetching its driver > > > > > > > > data from configfs callbacks in order to retrieve the name of the GPIO > > > > > > > > chip device. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > drivers/base/dd.c | 1 + > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c > > > > > > > > index 9179825ff646..c62c02e3490a 100644 > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/base/dd.c > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c > > > > > > > > @@ -353,6 +353,7 @@ bool device_is_bound(struct device *dev) > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > return dev->p && klist_node_attached(&dev->p->knode_driver); > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_is_bound); > > > > > > > > > > > > No. Please no. Why is this needed? Feels like someone is doing > > > > > > something really wrong... > > > > > > > > > > > > NACK. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I should have Cc'ed you the entire series, my bad. > > > > > > > > > > This is the patch that uses this change - it's a new, improved testing > > > > > module for GPIO using configfs & sysfs as you (I think) suggested a > > > > > while ago: > > > > > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/3/4/355 > > > > > > > > > > The story goes like this: committing the configfs item registers a > > > > > platform device. > > > > > > > > Ick, no, stop there, that's not a "real" device, please do not abuse > > > > platform devices like that, you all know I hate this :( > > > > > > > > Use the virtbus code instead perhaps? > > > > > > > > > > I have no idea what virtbus is and grepping for it only returns three > > > hits in: ./drivers/pci/iov.c and it's a function argument. > > > > > > If it stands for virtual bus then for sure it sounds like the right > > > thing but I need to find more info on this. > > > > Sorry, wrong name, see Documentation/driver-api/auxiliary_bus.rst for > > the details. "virtbus" was what I think about it as that was my > > original name for it, but it eventually got merged with a different > > name. > > > > > > > As far as I understand - there's no guarantee that > > > > > the device will be bound to a driver before the commit callback (or > > > > > more specifically platform_device_register_full() in this case) > > > > > returns so the user may try to retrieve the name of the device > > > > > immediately (normally user-space should wait for the associated uevent > > > > > but nobody can force that) by doing: > > > > > > > > > > mv /sys/kernel/config/gpio-sim/pending/foo /sys/kernel/config/gpio-sim/live/ > > > > > cat /sys/kernel/config/gpio-sim/live/foo/dev_name > > > > > > > > > > If the device is not bound at this point, we'll have a crash in the > > > > > kernel as opposed to just returning -ENODEV. > > > > > > > > How will the kernel crash? What has created the dev_name sysfs file > > > > before it is possible to be read from? That feels like the root > > > > problem. > > > > > > > > > > It's not sysfs - it's in configfs. Each chip has a read-only configfs > > > attribute that returns the name of the device - I don't really have a > > > better idea to map the configfs items to devices that committing > > > creates. > > > > Same question, why are you exporting a configfs attribute that can not > > be read from? Only export it when your driver is bound to the device. > > > > The device doesn't know anything about configfs. Why would it? The > configuration of a GPIO chip can't be changed after it's instantiated, > this is why we have committable items. > > We export a directory in configfs: gpio-sim -> user creates a new > directory (item) in gpio-sim/pending/foo and it's not tied to any > device yet but exports attributes which we use to configure the device > (label, number of lines, line names etc.), then we mv > gpio-sim/pending/foo gpio-sim/live and this is when the device gets > created and registered with the subsystem. We take all the configured > attributes and put them into device properties for both the driver and > gpiolib core (for standard properties) to read - just like we would > with a regular GPIO driver because this is the goal: test the core > code. Ok, but they why are you trying to have dev_name be an exported thing? I don't understand an attribute here that is visable but can not be read from. And why not just use the default device name function: dev_name(), which will always return a string that will work no matter if the device is bound to a driver or not. thanks, greg k-h