From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751611AbbEAS3G (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 1 May 2015 14:29:06 -0400
Received: from lb3-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.29]:55397 "EHLO
	lb3-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751193AbbEAS3D (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 1 May 2015 14:29:03 -0400
Message-ID: <1430504936.3928.13.camel@tiscali.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] coresight-etm4x: Adding CoreSight ETM4x driver
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kaixu Xia <kaixu.xia@linaro.org>,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 20:28:56 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CANLsYkywp0o8YtjkFwfvEiAje-w2jCWbs_82SiD29xdirA_7vQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1430327795-10710-1-git-send-email-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
	 <1430327795-10710-2-git-send-email-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>
	 <1430429397.2187.34.camel@x220>
	 <CANLsYkywp0o8YtjkFwfvEiAje-w2jCWbs_82SiD29xdirA_7vQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 (3.12.11-1.fc21) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Mathieu Poirier schreef op vr 01-05-2015 om 08:39 [-0600]:
> On 30 April 2015 at 15:29, Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 11:16 -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> >> +#include <linux/module.h>
> >
> > Is this include needed?
> 
> It is needed for "module_param_named()".

I guess that it should suffice to include just
include/linux/moduleparam.h. (Note that [...]/module.h includes
[...]/moduleparam.h.)

> >> +module_amba_driver(etm4x_driver);
> >
> > In a message I sent a short while ago, I suggested that for built-in
> > only code this is equivalent to calling
> >     amba_driver_register(&etm4x_driver);
> >
> > from within a function marked with some sort of *initcall(). Please
> > double check.
> 
> Built-in as a module or not using "module_amba_driver()" deals with
> redundant code.

This is becoming yet another pet peeve: idempotent macros prefixed with
module_. driver_ would be a better prefix. But, in this case,
driver_amba_driver() is silly, amba_driver is used already, and
register_amba_driver() looks like amba_driver_register() way too much.

I fear that this pet peeve is going to hang around my place for quite
some time.

Thanks,


Paul Bolle