Re: [PATCH] drivers: base: add cpu_device_create to support per-cpu devices

[Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 06:40:21PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 02/09/14 18:26, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 06:22:07PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >>Hi Greg,
> >>
> >>On 22/08/14 12:29, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >>>From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> >>>
> >>>This patch adds a new function to create per-cpu devices.
> >>>This helps in:
> >>>1. reusing the device infrastructure to create any cpu related
> >>>    attributes and corresponding sysfs instead of creating and
> >>>    dealing with raw kobjects directly
> >>>2. retaining the legacy path(/sys/devices/system/cpu/..) to support
> >>>    existing sysfs ABI
> >>>3. avoiding to create links in the bus directory pointing to the
> >>>    device as there would be per-cpu instance of these devices with
> >>>    the same name since dev->bus is not populated to cpu_sysbus on
> >>>    purpose
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> >>>Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> >>>---
> >>>  drivers/base/cpu.c  | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>  include/linux/cpu.h |  4 ++++
> >>>  2 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>>Hi Greg,
> >>>
> >>>Here is the alternate solution I could come up with instead of
> >>>creating cpu class. cpu_device_create is very similar to
> >>>device_create_groups_vargs w/o class support, but I could not
> >>>reuse anything else to avoid creating similar function.
> >>>
> >>>Let me know your thoughts/suggestions on this.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Any feedback on this ? If ok, I will respin cacheinfo series removing
> >>cpu class creation with this patch.
> >
> >Please address the issues others have already raised.
> >
> 
> If you meant issues raised on cacheinfo series, I have addressed them
> already in v3(raised by you, Stephen Boyd, Mark and Russell). I have
> retained hotplug notifiers which Stephen wanted to remove as I don't
> know if that's acceptable on all the architectures.
> 
> I posted this single patch as a replacement to the patch creating cpu
> class as Kay and David suggested that we can't have class and bus with
> same name.

Then I have no idea what is going on, sorry, please respin as you see
fit and resend...

thanks,

greg k-h