| Message ID | 2025020326-applicant-unwomanly-13df@gregkh (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Driver core: faux bus | expand |
On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 03:25:18PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > The dummy regulator driver does not need to create a platform device, it > only did so because it was simple to do. Change it over to use the > faux bus instead as this is NOT a real platform device, and it makes > the code even smaller than before. No, they did this because you explicitly asked that this be done.... > -static int dummy_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > +static int dummy_regulator_probe(struct faux_device *vdev) Just dev or fdev - we could just pass a struct device in here, we don't actually care that it's a platform device at this point. Having the abbreviation mismatch with the device type is odd.
On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 03:39:06PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 03:25:18PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > The dummy regulator driver does not need to create a platform device, it > > only did so because it was simple to do. Change it over to use the > > faux bus instead as this is NOT a real platform device, and it makes > > the code even smaller than before. > > No, they did this because you explicitly asked that this be done.... I did? What was it attempting to be before this? I don't remember that at all, sorry. > > -static int dummy_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > +static int dummy_regulator_probe(struct faux_device *vdev) > > Just dev or fdev - we could just pass a struct device in here, we don't > actually care that it's a platform device at this point. Having the > abbreviation mismatch with the device type is odd. Ah, that's a mistake from my first pass when this was a "struct virtual_device" and I called this "vdev". I'll go fix that up, thanks. greg k-h
On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 04:46:02PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 03:39:06PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 03:25:18PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > The dummy regulator driver does not need to create a platform device, it > > > only did so because it was simple to do. Change it over to use the > > > faux bus instead as this is NOT a real platform device, and it makes > > > the code even smaller than before. > > No, they did this because you explicitly asked that this be done.... > I did? What was it attempting to be before this? I don't remember that > at all, sorry. Yeah, there were some things where people were creating custom buses for internal uses like this which you pushed back on due to code duplication - you said to just use platform bus since the bus code looked identical.
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/dummy.c b/drivers/regulator/dummy.c index 5b9b9e4e762d..163b47e25291 100644 --- a/drivers/regulator/dummy.c +++ b/drivers/regulator/dummy.c @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ #include <linux/err.h> #include <linux/export.h> -#include <linux/platform_device.h> +#include <linux/device/faux.h> #include <linux/regulator/driver.h> #include <linux/regulator/machine.h> @@ -37,15 +37,15 @@ static const struct regulator_desc dummy_desc = { .ops = &dummy_ops, }; -static int dummy_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) +static int dummy_regulator_probe(struct faux_device *vdev) { struct regulator_config config = { }; int ret; - config.dev = &pdev->dev; + config.dev = &vdev->dev; config.init_data = &dummy_initdata; - dummy_regulator_rdev = devm_regulator_register(&pdev->dev, &dummy_desc, + dummy_regulator_rdev = devm_regulator_register(&vdev->dev, &dummy_desc, &config); if (IS_ERR(dummy_regulator_rdev)) { ret = PTR_ERR(dummy_regulator_rdev); @@ -56,36 +56,17 @@ static int dummy_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return 0; } -static struct platform_driver dummy_regulator_driver = { - .probe = dummy_regulator_probe, - .driver = { - .name = "reg-dummy", - .probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS, - }, +struct faux_driver_ops dummy_regulator_driver = { + .probe = dummy_regulator_probe, }; -static struct platform_device *dummy_pdev; +static struct faux_device *dummy_fdev; void __init regulator_dummy_init(void) { - int ret; - - dummy_pdev = platform_device_alloc("reg-dummy", -1); - if (!dummy_pdev) { + dummy_fdev = faux_device_create("reg-dummy", &dummy_regulator_driver); + if (!dummy_fdev) { pr_err("Failed to allocate dummy regulator device\n"); return; } - - ret = platform_device_add(dummy_pdev); - if (ret != 0) { - pr_err("Failed to register dummy regulator device: %d\n", ret); - platform_device_put(dummy_pdev); - return; - } - - ret = platform_driver_register(&dummy_regulator_driver); - if (ret != 0) { - pr_err("Failed to register dummy regulator driver: %d\n", ret); - platform_device_unregister(dummy_pdev); - } }
The dummy regulator driver does not need to create a platform device, it only did so because it was simple to do. Change it over to use the faux bus instead as this is NOT a real platform device, and it makes the code even smaller than before. Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> --- drivers/regulator/dummy.c | 37 +++++++++---------------------------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)