On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:
On Friday 15 March 2013, Fabio Porcedda wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
* Regarding the use of module_platform_driver_probe, I'm a little worried about
the interactions with deferred probing. I don't think there are any regressions,
but we should probably make people aware that one cannot return -EPROBE_DEFER
from a platform_driver_probe function.
The use of module_platform_driver_probe() doesn't change anything about that,
it's exactly the same thing as using "return platform_driver_probe()".
I'm right or I'm missing something? Maybe are you just speaking about
the misuse of "platform_driver_probe"?
Yes, that was what I meant. The point is that if we need to review or remove
all uses of platform_driver_probe, it would be better not to introduce a
module_platform_driver_probe() interface to make it easier to use.
Just to let you know, the module_platform_driver_probe() macro is
already in v3.9-rc1 and is already used by some drivers.
In linux-next there are already many patches that use that macro.
Best regards
--
Fabio Porcedda