Hi Corey, Thanks for the review.
On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 04:10:32PM -0500, Corey Minyard wrote: > Can you name the file usb_lstp.c, or something like that, to match > the other BMC side devices? Sure. Would lstp_bmc.c work, next to ssif_bmc.c and kcs_bmc.c? Otherwise usb_lstp.c it is. >> +static DEFINE_IDA(lstp_ipmi_ida); > > Wouldn't you want to assign the numbers in the device tree so they > always have the same number? I'd rather keep them out of DT. The binding rules ask not to add instance index properties or custom aliases (Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst): DT describes the hardware, not how Linux numbers its device nodes. Our out-of-tree driver used to take the node name from a "label" property, and we dropped it for that reason. A stable name comes from udev instead. The node's parent is the channel's auxiliary device under the USB device, so a rule matching the USB port path and the channel can add a symlink with whatever name the BMC userspace expects. > It seems a little strange to set this up here and then register it in > the next section. Why not set it up right before the register? > > The breakup of the probe function seems a little unnatural. Not a > bit deal, but it makes the code a little harder to follow. Agreed. The next version fills in the miscdevice right before misc_register() and folds the init and start helpers into one probe function. Thanks, Adrian _______________________________________________ Openipmi-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
