From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B151DC282DD for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 16:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C44320673 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 16:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728803AbgAJQIy (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jan 2020 11:08:54 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:30930 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728408AbgAJQIy (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jan 2020 11:08:54 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Jan 2020 08:08:53 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,417,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="224235858" Received: from nehudak-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.251.145.164]) ([10.251.145.164]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Jan 2020 08:08:52 -0800 Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5 09/17] soundwire: intel: remove platform devices and use 'Master Devices' instead To: Vinod Koul Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, tiwai@suse.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ranjani Sridharan , broonie@kernel.org, srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org, jank@cadence.com, slawomir.blauciak@intel.com, Sanyog Kale , Bard liao , Rander Wang References: <20191217210314.20410-1-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> <20191217210314.20410-10-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> <20191227090826.GM3006@vkoul-mobl> <5be4d9df-0f46-d36f-471c-aae9e1f55cc0@linux.intel.com> <20200106054221.GN2818@vkoul-mobl> <32ae46a7-59ee-4815-270a-a519ff462345@linux.intel.com> <20200110064303.GX2818@vkoul-mobl> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart Message-ID: <39000dd7-3f77-bc33-0ad3-aa47ba2360f7@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 10:08:51 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200110064303.GX2818@vkoul-mobl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> The "big" difference is that probe is called by core (asoc) and not by >>> driver onto themselves.. IMO that needs to go away. >> >> What I did is not different from what existed already with platform devices. >> They were manually created, weren't they? > > Manual creation of device based on a requirement is different, did I ask > you why you are creating device :) > > I am simple asking you not to call probe in the driver. If you need > that, move it to core! We do not want these kind of things in the > drivers... What core are you talking about? The SOF intel driver needs to create a device, which will then be bound with a SoundWire master driver. What I am doing is no different from what your team did with platform_register_device, I am really lost on what you are asking. >>>> FWIW, the implementation here follows what was suggested for Greybus 'Host >>>> Devices' [1] [2], so it's not like I am creating any sort of dangerous >>>> precedent. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/greybus/es2.c#L1275 >>>> [2] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/greybus/hd.c#L124 >>> >>> And if you look closely all this work is done by core not by drivers! >>> Drivers _should_ never do all this, it is the job of core to do that for >>> you. >> >> Please look at the code again, you have a USB probe that will manually call >> the GreyBus device creation. >> >> static int ap_probe(struct usb_interface *interface, >> const struct usb_device_id *id) >> { >> hd = gb_hd_create(&es2_driver, &udev->dev, >> >> >> static struct usb_driver es2_ap_driver = { >> .name = "es2_ap_driver", >> .probe = ap_probe, <<< code above >> .disconnect = ap_disconnect, >> .id_table = id_table, >> .soft_unbind = 1, >> }; > > Look closely the driver es2 calls into greybus core hd.c and gets the > work done, subtle but a big differances in the approaches.. I am sorry, I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to. The code I copy/pasted here makes no call to the greybus core, it's ap_probe -> gb_hd_create. No core involved. If I am mistaken, please show me what I got wrong.