From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
Damien LeMoal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>
Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] libata: rework sysfs naming
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2022 08:10:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <74bc701e-8ac1-a572-0b38-a60c0fe163b7@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <62a7433e-d9f4-a95b-818c-0f1d31160ac8@opensource.wdc.com>
On 3/25/22 04:05, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 3/24/22 21:32, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> This patch adds a new dummy bus 'ata', which collects all ata device
>> objects like ata_port, ata_link, and ata_dev, and adds an 'ata' prefix
>> to the message log.
>> To be consistent with the other libata objects the 'ata_port' object name
>> has been changed from 'ata' to 'port'.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
>> ---
>> drivers/ata/libata-transport.c | 21 +++++++++++--
>> include/linux/libata.h | 54 ++++++++++------------------------
>> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-transport.c
>> b/drivers/ata/libata-transport.c
>> index ca129854a88c..555fe6e2293d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-transport.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-transport.c
>> @@ -81,10 +81,13 @@ struct ata_internal {
>> tdev_to_port((dev)->parent)
>> -/* Device objects are always created whit link objects */
>> +/* Device objects are always created with link objects */
>> static int ata_tdev_add(struct ata_device *dev);
>> static void ata_tdev_delete(struct ata_device *dev);
>> +struct bus_type ata_bus_type = {
>> + .name = "ata",
>> +};
>> /*
>> * Hack to allow attributes of the same name in different objects.
>> @@ -288,7 +291,9 @@ int ata_tport_add(struct device *parent,
>> dev->parent = parent;
>> ata_host_get(ap->host);
>> dev->release = ata_tport_release;
>> - dev_set_name(dev, "ata%d", ap->print_id);
>> + dev->bus = &ata_bus_type;
>> + dev_set_name(dev, "port%d", ap->print_id);
>> +
>> transport_setup_device(dev);
>> ata_acpi_bind_port(ap);
>> error = device_add(dev);
>> @@ -444,6 +449,8 @@ int ata_tlink_add(struct ata_link *link)
>> device_initialize(dev);
>> dev->parent = &ap->tdev;
>> dev->release = ata_tlink_release;
>> + dev->bus = &ata_bus_type;
>> +
>> if (ata_is_host_link(link))
>> dev_set_name(dev, "link%d", ap->print_id);
>> else
>> @@ -695,8 +702,10 @@ static int ata_tdev_add(struct ata_device *ata_dev)
>> device_initialize(dev);
>> dev->parent = &link->tdev;
>> dev->release = ata_tdev_release;
>> + dev->bus = &ata_bus_type;
>> +
>> if (ata_is_host_link(link))
>> - dev_set_name(dev, "dev%d.%d", ap->print_id,ata_dev->devno);
>> + dev_set_name(dev, "dev%d.%d", ap->print_id, ata_dev->devno);
>> else
>> dev_set_name(dev, "dev%d.%d.0", ap->print_id, link->pmp);
>> @@ -822,8 +831,13 @@ __init int libata_transport_init(void)
>> error = transport_class_register(&ata_dev_class);
>> if (error)
>> goto out_unregister_port;
>> + error = bus_register(&ata_bus_type);
>> + if (error)
>> + goto out_unregister_bus;
>
> Why is it needed to call bus_unregister() if bus_register() fails ?
> Shouldn't this be a "goto out_unregister_dev" which does a
> "transport_class_unregister(&ata_dev_class)" ?
>
Ah yes. You are right.
>> return 0;
>> + out_unregister_bus:
>> + bus_unregister(&ata_bus_type);
>> out_unregister_port:
>> transport_class_unregister(&ata_port_class);
>> out_unregister_link:
>> @@ -835,6 +849,7 @@ __init int libata_transport_init(void)
>> void __exit libata_transport_exit(void)
>> {
>> + bus_unregister(&ata_bus_type);
>> transport_class_unregister(&ata_link_class);
>> transport_class_unregister(&ata_port_class);
>> transport_class_unregister(&ata_dev_class);
>> diff --git a/include/linux/libata.h b/include/linux/libata.h
>> index 0619ae462ecd..b17683b00c90 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/libata.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/libata.h
>> @@ -835,6 +835,7 @@ struct ata_port {
>> struct ata_host *host;
>> struct device *dev;
>> struct device tdev;
>> + struct device cdev;
>
> This one is not used...
>
Yeah, left-over from previous iteration.
I'll be resending.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-25 7:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-24 12:32 [PATCHv3 0/2] libata: sysfs naming Hannes Reinecke
2022-03-24 12:32 ` [PATCH 1/2] libata: rework " Hannes Reinecke
2022-03-25 3:05 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-03-25 7:10 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2022-03-24 12:32 ` [PATCH 2/2] libata: CONFIG_ATA_SYSFS_COMPAT Hannes Reinecke
2022-03-25 3:01 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-03-25 7:12 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-03-25 7:16 ` Damien Le Moal
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-03-25 12:56 [PATCHv4 0/2] libata: sysfs naming Hannes Reinecke
2022-03-25 12:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] libata: rework " Hannes Reinecke
2022-03-26 18:12 ` kernel test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=74bc701e-8ac1-a572-0b38-a60c0fe163b7@suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
--cc=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
--cc=damien.lemoal@wdc.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox