Am 11.11.19 um 07:40 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 06:42:05AM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> Am 11.11.19 um 06:27 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman:
>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 05:56:09AM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>> Use of soc_device_to_device() in driver modules causes a build failure.
>>>> Given that the helper is nicely documented in include/linux/sys_soc.h,
>>>> let's export it as GPL symbol.
>>>
>>> I thought we were fixing the soc drivers to not need this. What
>>> happened to that effort? I thought I had patches in my tree (or
>>> someone's tree) that did some of this work already, such that this
>>> symbol isn't needed anymore.
>>
>> I do still see this function used in next-20191108 in drivers/soc/.
>>
>> I'll be happy to adjust my RFC driver if someone points me to how!
>
> Look at c31e73121f4c ("base: soc: Handle custom soc information sysfs
> entries") for how you can just use the default attributes for the soc to
> create the needed sysfs files, instead of having to do it "by hand"
> which is racy and incorrect.
Unrelated.
>> Given the current struct layout, a type cast might work (but ugly).
>> Or if we stay with my current RFC driver design, we could use the
>> platform_device instead of the soc_device (which would clutter the
>> screen more than "soc soc0:") or resort to pr_info() w/o device.
>
> Ick, no, don't cast blindly. What do you need the pointer for? Is this
> for in-tree code?
No, an RFC patchset: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11224261/
As I indicated above, I used it for a dev_info(), which I can easily
avoid by using pr_info() instead:
diff --git a/drivers/soc/realtek/chip.c b/drivers/soc/realtek/chip.c
index e5078c6731fd..f9380e831659 100644
--- a/drivers/soc/realtek/chip.c
+++ b/drivers/soc/realtek/chip.c
@@ -178,8 +178,7 @@ static int rtd_soc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
platform_set_drvdata(pdev, soc_dev);
- dev_info(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev),
- "%s %s (0x%08x) rev %s (0x%08x) detected\n",
+ pr_info("%s %s (0x%08x) rev %s (0x%08x) detected\n",
soc_dev_attr->family, soc_dev_attr->soc_id, chip_id,
soc_dev_attr->revision, chip_rev);
But as I said, there is still in-tree code using this helper:
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/core.c: return soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Returned from ep93xx_init_soc(), which is passed through by
ep93xx_init_devices():
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/adssphere.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/edb93xx.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/gesbc9312.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/micro9.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/simone.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/snappercl15.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/ts72xx.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/ts72xx.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/vision_ep9307.c: ep93xx_init_devices();
Return value unused everywhere.
arch/arm/mach-imx/cpu.c: return soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Used as return value of imx_soc_device_init():
arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c: parent = imx_soc_device_init();
arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6sl.c: parent = imx_soc_device_init();
arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6sx.c: parent = imx_soc_device_init();
arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6ul.c: parent = imx_soc_device_init();
These do a NULL check and pass it to of_platform_default_populate().
arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx7d.c: parent = imx_soc_device_init();
This one only does a NULL check.
arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx7ulp.c:
of_platform_default_populate(NULL, NULL, imx_soc_device_init());
Speaks for itself.
arch/arm/mach-mxs/mach-mxs.c: parent = soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Passed to of_platform_default_populate().
arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c: parent = soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Used for device_create_file().
arch/arm/mach-zynq/common.c: parent = soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Passed to of_platform_default_populate().
drivers/soc/amlogic/meson-gx-socinfo.c: dev = soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Used for dev_info(). CONFIG_MESON_GX_SOCINFO is bool, thus not affected.
drivers/soc/amlogic/meson-mx-socinfo.c:
dev_info(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev), "Amlogic %s %s detected\n",
Speaks for itself. CONFIG_MESON_MX_SOCINFO is bool, thus not affected.
drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra.c: return soc_device_to_device(dev);
Returned from tegra_soc_device_register(). For arm64 NULL-checked only,
but also used for arm in arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra.c:tegra_dt_init(),
which passes it to of_platform_default_populate().
drivers/soc/ux500/ux500-soc-id.c: parent =
soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Used for device_create_file().
drivers/soc/versatile/soc-integrator.c: dev = soc_device_to_device(soc_dev);
Used for device_create_file().
drivers/soc/versatile/soc-realview.c:
device_create_file(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev), &realview_manf_attr);
drivers/soc/versatile/soc-realview.c:
device_create_file(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev), &realview_board_attr);
drivers/soc/versatile/soc-realview.c:
device_create_file(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev), &realview_arch_attr);
drivers/soc/versatile/soc-realview.c:
device_create_file(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev), &realview_build_attr);
Speaks for itself.
So, not counting my unmerged Realtek driver,
* we have two cases of struct device being used for dev_info(), which
could be cleaned up with device-less pr_info(), I could post a patch,
* frequent usage in arm/mach-* for of_platform_default_populate(), this
seems most difficult to replace if we neither want to cast nor expose
the struct,
* some simply unused, which could be refactored to return void, and
* some for device_create_file(), which could probably be avoided with
custom_attr_group.
It also raises the question of whether new arm platforms such as RTD1195
(mach-realtek) should attempt to use of_platform_default_populate() with
the soc_device somehow, or if not, whether those platforms should be
refactored to consistently no longer do so?
I believe in the Broken Window Theory, i.e. fixing what we can before
mistakes get copied and propagate further in code; but here I don't see
a perspective for getting rid of soc_device_to_device() completely to
prevent new usages, nor can I test all of those platforms myself.
Has a cleanup based on custom_attr_group been attempted already and is
waiting on patches to get reviewed and merged through maintainer trees,
or do we need to prepare new cleanup patches here? A search for
"soc_device_to_device" on LAKML Patchwork shows only this patch of mine.
Thanks,
Andreas
--
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg)
