On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 02:53:13PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Finn,
(responding immediately to patches doing non-kosher things ;-)
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:57 AM, Finn Thain <fthain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 6 May 2018, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
Why not just have an "bus is registered" flag in your driver
register function that refuses to let drivers register with the
driver core if it isn't set?
Perhaps that should happen in the core driver_register() function.
BUG_ON is frowned upon, after all. Would that be acceptable?
I don't understand what you mean here, perhaps make a patch to show it?
As an alternative to your suggestion (add flag to avoid the BUG_ON):
--- a/drivers/base/driver.c
+++ b/drivers/base/driver.c
@@ -148,7 +148,10 @@ int driver_register(struct device_driver *drv)
int ret;
struct device_driver *other;
- BUG_ON(!drv->bus->p);
+ if (!drv->bus->p) {
+ WARN_ONCE(1, "Cannot register driver with invalid bus\n");
+ return -EPROBE_DEFER;
+ }
if ((drv->bus->probe && drv->probe) ||
(drv->bus->remove && drv->remove) ||
I'm not actually proposing this change; just responding to your question.
The bus_type.p field may be unused by some bus drivers, hence this
would prevent their drivers from being registered.
bus_type.p is an internal-to-the-driver-core structure, no bus driver
should ever be touching it. This is a catch to see if someone is using
the driver core incorrectly.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
