Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:34:49 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_PHUB driver to 2.6.35 |
| |
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 09:30:51PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Greg KH" <gregkh@suse.de> > To: "Masayuki Ohtake" <masa-korg@dsn.okisemi.com> > Cc: <meego-dev@meego.com>; "LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; <yong.y.wang@intel.com>; <qi.wang@intel.com>; > <andrew.chih.howe.khor@intel.com>; <arjan@linux.intel.com>; <alan@linux.intel.com>; <margie.foster@intel.com>; > "Morinaga" <morinaga526@dsn.okisemi.com> > Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 12:22 AM > Subject: Re: [MeeGo-Dev][PATCH] Topcliff: Update PCH_PHUB driver to 2.6.35 > > > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 09:25:03PM +0900, Masayuki Ohtake wrote: > > > Please find <MASA> > > > > If someone takes the time to review your code and ask questions, it is > > considered common courtesy to at least answer them all and not ignore > > some of them. Please do so. > > > > > > > drivers/misc/Kconfig | 9 + > > > > > drivers/misc/Makefile | 1 + > > > > > drivers/misc/pch_phub.c | 722 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > 3 files changed, 732 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > create mode 100755 drivers/misc/pch_phub.c > > > > > > > > You forgot to add documentation for your sysfs files in > > > > Documentation/ABI/ which is a requiremend when you add new ones. > > > > > > <MASA> > > > Which folder should we put stable/ or testing/ ? > > > > Which do you feel it should be in? > I think 'testing' is appropriate.
Ok, when will you feel they should move to "stable"?
> > > > > +}; > > > > > + > > > > > +/* SROM SPEC for MAC address assignment offset */ > > > > > +static const int pch_phub_mac_offset[ETH_ALEN] = {0x3, 0x2, 0x1, 0x0, 0xb, 0xa}; > > > > > + > > > > > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(pch_phub_mutex); > > > > > +static struct pch_phub_reg pch_phub_reg; > > > > > > > > So you can only have one of these devices in a system at the same time? > > > > What happens when a machine ships with two of them? > > > > > > <MASA> > > > I can't understand the above questioin meaning. > > > Give me more information, please. > > > What's does the above "these devices" mean? > > > > The device the driver is controlling. What happens when this driver > > runs on a system that has 2 of these devices? You need to be able to > > handle multiple devices, and that doesn't happen with a single variable, > > right? Please dynamically allocate it and make the lock associated to > > the actual device, not the whole driver, if possible. > I can understand your saying. > But our driver for Topcliff doesn't support multiple device but single device only. > From LSI structure point of view, I think, it is impossible that > topcliff is used as multiple devices.
Are you sure that this is going to be true?
> None the less, should our driver support multiple device ?
Yes, it is trivial to make it support multiple devices, which makes it easier in the future if you happen to have a machine with more than one.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |