On Tue, 04 Jul 2017 21:37:48 +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de writes:
On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 21:43:58 +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
+static struct bus_type ac97_bus_type = {
- .name = "ac97",
Name-conflict with the old ac97 bus?
Yeah, fair point. So what should I choose for this new one ?
- ac97new
- ac97bis
- ac97_2
- ac97reborn
ac97bus ac97_episode_5 ac98 ...
I have no opinion on it.
+static int __init ac97_bus_init(void) +{
- return bus_register(&ac97_bus_type);
+} +subsys_initcall(ac97_bus_init);
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); +MODULE_AUTHOR("Robert Jarzmik robert.jarzmik@free.fr");
No bus_unregister() at exit?
Mmmh, that's because I used subsys_initcall(), which doesn't look good in a module compilation setup. That will require a module_init(), and I will think about how to implement it and test it for next iteration.
You can use subsys_init() for modules, it's no problem. When it's built for a module, all xxx_init() is handled as equivalent with module_init(). See linux/module.h.
It's just the lack of module_exit() in your case.
thanks,
Takashi