[v4,2/5] mmc: move 'parent' tracking to mmc_blk_data
diff mbox

Message ID 146654197196.34694.11595948607042214658.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com
State New
Headers show

Commit Message

Dan Williams June 21, 2016, 8:46 p.m. UTC
In preparation for the removal of 'driverfs_dev' from 'struct gendisk',
carry this data in mmc_blk_data. It is used for registration of parent
disks and partitions.

Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Reported-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
---
 drivers/mmc/card/block.c |    5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Bart Van Assche June 22, 2016, 6:38 a.m. UTC | #1
On 06/21/2016 10:46 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> In preparation for the removal of 'driverfs_dev' from 'struct gendisk',
> carry this data in mmc_blk_data. It is used for registration of parent
> disks and partitions.
>
> Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
> Reported-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mmc/card/block.c |    5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> index 383184743f9a..d1733424bf6e 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(mmc_blk_lock);
>   */
>  struct mmc_blk_data {
>  	spinlock_t	lock;
> +	struct device	*parent;
>  	struct gendisk	*disk;
>  	struct mmc_queue queue;
>  	struct list_head part;
> @@ -2270,7 +2271,7 @@ again:
>  	md->disk->fops = &mmc_bdops;
>  	md->disk->private_data = md;
>  	md->disk->queue = md->queue.queue;
> -	md->disk->driverfs_dev = parent;
> +	md->parent = parent;
>  	set_disk_ro(md->disk, md->read_only || default_ro);
>  	md->disk->flags = GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT;
>  	if (area_type & (MMC_BLK_DATA_AREA_RPMB | MMC_BLK_DATA_AREA_BOOT))
> @@ -2458,7 +2459,7 @@ static int mmc_add_disk(struct mmc_blk_data *md)
>  	int ret;
>  	struct mmc_card *card = md->queue.card;
>
> -	add_disk(md->disk);
> +	device_add_disk(md->parent, md->disk);
>  	md->force_ro.show = force_ro_show;
>  	md->force_ro.store = force_ro_store;
>  	sysfs_attr_init(&md->force_ro.attr);

What will the impact be of this patch on code that accesses driverfs_dev 
like printk_all_partitions()? Will this patch hurt bisectability?

Thanks,

Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Dan Williams June 22, 2016, 5:03 p.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Bart Van Assche
<bart.vanassche@sandisk.com> wrote:
> On 06/21/2016 10:46 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>>
>> In preparation for the removal of 'driverfs_dev' from 'struct gendisk',
>> carry this data in mmc_blk_data. It is used for registration of parent
>> disks and partitions.
>>
>> Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
>> Reported-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/mmc/card/block.c |    5 +++--
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
>> index 383184743f9a..d1733424bf6e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
>> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(mmc_blk_lock);
>>   */
>>  struct mmc_blk_data {
>>         spinlock_t      lock;
>> +       struct device   *parent;
>>         struct gendisk  *disk;
>>         struct mmc_queue queue;
>>         struct list_head part;
>> @@ -2270,7 +2271,7 @@ again:
>>         md->disk->fops = &mmc_bdops;
>>         md->disk->private_data = md;
>>         md->disk->queue = md->queue.queue;
>> -       md->disk->driverfs_dev = parent;
>> +       md->parent = parent;
>>         set_disk_ro(md->disk, md->read_only || default_ro);
>>         md->disk->flags = GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT;
>>         if (area_type & (MMC_BLK_DATA_AREA_RPMB | MMC_BLK_DATA_AREA_BOOT))
>> @@ -2458,7 +2459,7 @@ static int mmc_add_disk(struct mmc_blk_data *md)
>>         int ret;
>>         struct mmc_card *card = md->queue.card;
>>
>> -       add_disk(md->disk);
>> +       device_add_disk(md->parent, md->disk);
>>         md->force_ro.show = force_ro_show;
>>         md->force_ro.store = force_ro_store;
>>         sysfs_attr_init(&md->force_ro.attr);
>
>
> What will the impact be of this patch on code that accesses driverfs_dev
> like printk_all_partitions()? Will this patch hurt bisectability?

Hmm, yes there will be a point in the history where
printk_all_partitions() will print " (driver?)" for mmc devices
instead of " driver: %s".  I would not classify that as breaking
bisection, but it's easy enough to fix up in v5.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Patch
diff mbox

diff --git a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
index 383184743f9a..d1733424bf6e 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
@@ -93,6 +93,7 @@  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(mmc_blk_lock);
  */
 struct mmc_blk_data {
 	spinlock_t	lock;
+	struct device	*parent;
 	struct gendisk	*disk;
 	struct mmc_queue queue;
 	struct list_head part;
@@ -2270,7 +2271,7 @@  again:
 	md->disk->fops = &mmc_bdops;
 	md->disk->private_data = md;
 	md->disk->queue = md->queue.queue;
-	md->disk->driverfs_dev = parent;
+	md->parent = parent;
 	set_disk_ro(md->disk, md->read_only || default_ro);
 	md->disk->flags = GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT;
 	if (area_type & (MMC_BLK_DATA_AREA_RPMB | MMC_BLK_DATA_AREA_BOOT))
@@ -2458,7 +2459,7 @@  static int mmc_add_disk(struct mmc_blk_data *md)
 	int ret;
 	struct mmc_card *card = md->queue.card;
 
-	add_disk(md->disk);
+	device_add_disk(md->parent, md->disk);
 	md->force_ro.show = force_ro_show;
 	md->force_ro.store = force_ro_store;
 	sysfs_attr_init(&md->force_ro.attr);