Re: [PATCH RFC] usb gadget: introduce usb_gadget_probe_driver

["Michał Nazarewicz" <m.nazarewicz@samsung.com>]

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:26:02 +0200, Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig <u.kleine-koen=
ig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 05:16:46PM +0200, Micha=C5=82 Nazarewicz wrote=
:
>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:49:14 +0200, Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig <u.kleine-k=
oenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
>>
>>> This is like usb_gadget_register_driver with the only difference tha=
t it
>>> gets the bind function as parameter instead of using driver->bind.  =
This
>>> allows fixing section mismatches like
>>>
>>> 	WARNING: drivers/usb/gadget/g_printer.o(.data+0xc): Section mismatc=
h in
>>> 	reference from the variable printer_driver to the function
>>> 	.init.text:printer_bind()
>>> 	The variable printer_driver references
>>> 	the function __init printer_bind()
>>>
>>> by using usb_gadget_probe_driver with driver->bind =3D NULL.  When a=
ll
>>> drivers are fixed to use the new function the bind member of struct
>>> usb_gadget_driver can go away.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de=
>
>>> Cc: Michal Nazarewicz <m.nazarewicz@samsung.com>
>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>

BTW. Dunno if there is a reason to put me on Cc and Greg will be in
Signed-off-by anyway.

>>> ---
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> there is an alternative patch in Greg's tree [1], but IMHO mine is
>>> better as it doesn't need __ref.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Personally I don't see advantage of this over changing the __init to =
__ref.
>> Or am I missing something?  I see your patch as an unnecessary API ch=
ange.
>> The way I understand it, __ref was introduced exactly for cases like =
this
>> one where function is referenced from "normal" data but used only dur=
ing
>> init.  Could you try to clarify for me why you think your solution is=

>> better then mine?

> - Using __ref instead of __init moves all bind functions from .init.te=
xt
>   to .text and so the code isn't freed after booting or module loading=
.
>   (OK, you could fix this by marking the driver structs as __ref and
>   keep __init for the bind functions.)

I believe this to be untrue.  __ref puts code in .ref.text which AFAIK i=
s
freed.

> - Using __ref might hide section mismatches.  (Your patch hasn't this
>   problem as the bind functions used to live in .init.text, so any
>   reference to .init should be OK assuming that it was OK to live in
>   .init.text in the first place.  But when marking the driver structs
>   this is an issue.)  That's why I don't like __ref and said my patch
>   were better as it doesn't make use of it.
>
> - The bind functions are only called at init time, so there is no need=

>   to save a pointer to it.

OK, I see some merit in this approach.  However, the same issue is with
usb_configuration and ?usb_composite_driver -- those should be changed
in the same way or it would defeat the purpose of the patch.

-- =

Best regards,                                        _     _
| Humble Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of  o' \,=3D./ `o
| Computer Science,  Micha=C5=82 "mina86" Nazarewicz       (o o)
+----[mina86*mina86.com]---[mina86*jabber.org]----ooO--(_)--Ooo--