Hi,
David Cohen <david.a.cohen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Hi Felipe,
>
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_usb_mux_register);
>> > +
>> > +void intel_usb_mux_unregister(struct intel_usb_mux *mux)
>> > +{
>> > + extcon_unregister_notifier(&mux->edev, EXTCON_USB_HOST, &mux->nb);
>> > + extcon_dev_unregister(&mux->edev);
>> > + writel(mux->cfg0_ctx, mux->regs + INTEL_MUX_CFG0);
>> > + iounmap(mux->regs);
>> > + kfree(mux);
>> > +}
>> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_usb_mux_unregister);
>>
>> so who's gonna call these two functions ? IMO, this looks like a recipe
>> for randbuild breakage.
>
> There are function stubs on header file when the functions aren't
> available.
> But also notice CONFIG_EXTCON_INTEL_USB is not user-selectable. It's
> automatically selected when a driver that requires it is selected too.
>
> With the 2 cases above, IMHO it should not bring issues with randbuild
> tests.
right now it won't break, that's correct :-) But things change over time
and this is, at least, fragile. I mean, why couldn't this mux be an
actual driver ?
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
