On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 05:16:05PM +0900, Takashi Sakamoto wrote:
Hi,
On Jun 29 2017 16:56, Vinod Koul wrote:
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 04:43:38PM +0900, Takashi Sakamoto wrote:
Hi,
Hi Takashi,
+struct skl_debug *skl_debugfs_init(struct skl *skl) +{
- struct skl_debug *d;
- d = devm_kzalloc(&skl->pci->dev, sizeof(*d), GFP_KERNEL);
- if (!d)
return NULL;- /* create the root dir first */
- d->fs = debugfs_create_dir(KBUILD_MODNAME, NULL);
ALSA SoC part has a debugfs support. It adds "asoc" node into debugfs mount point and export "snd_soc_debugfs_root" symbol as a root node. I think it a better idea to collect relevant nodes into the place, rather than dispersing them.
Yes we can use that, but then this is very driver specific info, does it make sense to keep under framework 'asoc' ?
It makes sense in a point that it's a part of drivers in ALSA SoC part.
Yes that is a very valid point indeed
If we decide to use that, a more intuitive place might be "platform" rather than "asoc" which creates dependency on sound card creation which might happen much later.
for debug, I would like to avoid complexity and go with simple device approach...
I have no objection to your opinion. I like an idea "keep it short and simple". If no issues I had, I would select the same direction. However, space on debugfs is one of shared resources on system. If being polite to the other subsystems, it's better to avoid scattering it, in my opinion.
For naming scheme or directory structure inner the node, please have enough discussion with the other developers for ALSA SoC part. But in this timing, it would be acceptable to add your node just under "asoc" node. The arrangement could be done later.
Okay we rechecked and we could use component.debugfs_root which would point to component directory which seems more apt, so we will use that instead of root 'asoc'
Thanks for the suggestions, will send v3 shortly