On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 12:43:32PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 10:41:23AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 23/03/2022 03:58, Jung Daehwan wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 10:59:06AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > >> On 04/03/2022 07:23, Daehwan Jung wrote: > > >>> Export symbols for xhci hooks usage: > > >>> xhci_ring_free > > >>> - Allow xhci hook to free xhci_ring. > > >> > > >> Instead of copying-pasting the name of function, please explain why do > > >> you need these symbols exported. > > >> > > >> The "Why" is actually one of most important questions, because "what is > > >> this patch doing" we can easily see... > > >> > > >>> > > >>> xhci_get_slot_ctx > > >>> - Allow xhci hook to get slot_ctx from the xhci_container_ctx > > >>> for getting the slot_ctx information to know which slot is > > >>> offloading and compare the context in remote subsystem memory > > >>> if needed. > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> Krzysztof > > >> > > > > > > Hi Krzysztof > > > > > > xhci_ring_free has been removed from v3.. > > > The reason why I want to export is for managing vendor specific ring. > > > I want to alloc and free vendor specific ring on specific address. > > > It's done with xhci hooks. > > > > It's better, but still does not explain why these have to be exported. > > Please mention where are these hooks going to be. Where are they > > implemented. I actually expect all of these exports to be used in your > > patchset. > > All exports _HAVE_ to be used by the patchset. Otherwise it's an > invalid submission. > > thanks, > > greg k-h > Yes. I removed unneeded exports on v3. Best Regards, Jung Daehwan
