lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] virtio: make PCI devices take a virtio_pci module ref
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 16:25 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
    > Mark McLoughlin wrote:
    > >> Fix the virtio bus instead.
    > >
    > > Yeah, the patch I posted wasn't meant as a fix for this traceback.
    >
    > So what's the module_get patch needed for?

    A misguided attempt to create an artificial dependency between virtio
    device drivers and the virtio bus implementation?

    > > Here's one that does fix it.
    > ...
    > > From: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@redhat.com>
    > > Subject: [PATCH] virtio: add device release() function
    > >
    > > Add a release() function for virtio_pci devices so as to avoid:
    > >
    > > Device 'virtio0' does not have a release() function, it is broken and must be fixed
    > >
    > > The struct device is embedded in the struct virtio_pci_device which
    > > is freed by virtio_pci_remove(), so virtio_pci_release_dev() need
    > > not actually do anything.
    > >
    > > Signed-off-by: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@redhat.com>
    > > ---
    > > drivers/virtio/virtio_pci.c | 6 ++++++
    > > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
    > >
    > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci.c
    > > index c7dc37c..7d4899c 100644
    > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci.c
    > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci.c
    > > @@ -70,12 +70,17 @@ static struct pci_device_id virtio_pci_id_table[] = {
    > >
    > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, virtio_pci_id_table);
    > >
    > > +static void virtio_pci_release_dev(struct device *dev)
    > > +{
    > > +}
    >
    > You have to have a strong reason to have empty release. This is not the
    > case, you should do the free here, not in remove, I suppose.

    Okay, see the other patch I just sent.

    > > @@ -328,6 +333,7 @@ static int __devinit virtio_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pci_dev,
    > > return -ENOMEM;
    > >
    > > vp_dev->vdev.dev.parent = &virtio_pci_root;
    > > + vp_dev->vdev.dev.release = virtio_pci_release_dev;
    >
    > This should rather be in register_virtio_device

    Why? Because dev.release should be set by the same place that does
    device_register() or ...?

    The resources being allocated here are virtio-pci specific, so if we
    wanted to do something like this we'd perhaps need to add a ->release()
    to struct virtio_device and just call that hook.

    Cheers,
    Mark.



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-12-05 19:39    [W:0.023 / U:0.852 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site