Re: [PATCH RFC] usb gadget: introduce usb_gadget_probe_driver

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

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:49:14 +0200, Uwe Kleine-K=C3=B6nig <u.kleine-koen=
ig@pengutronix.de> wrote:

> This is like usb_gadget_register_driver with the only difference that =
it
> gets the bind function as parameter instead of using driver->bind.  Th=
is
> allows fixing section mismatches like
>
> 	WARNING: drivers/usb/gadget/g_printer.o(.data+0xc): Section mismatch =
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 all=

> 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>
> ---
> 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 __r=
ef.
Or am I missing something?  I see your patch as an unnecessary API chang=
e.
The way I understand it, __ref was introduced exactly for cases like thi=
s
one where function is referenced from "normal" data but used only during=

init.  Could you try to clarify for me why you think your solution is
better then mine?

-- =

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--