Hi Simon,
2014-12-03 2:47 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass <[email protected]>: > Hi Masahiro, > > On 1 December 2014 at 22:31, Masahiro Yamada <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> >> I have a question about handlers of struct uclass_driver. >> >> >> When binding a device, >> "uc->uc_drv->post_bind()" is called *before* "drv->bind()", >> so the name "pre_bind()" is more suitable than "post_bind()", isn't it? >> > > The uclass post_bind() is called after the device is bound to the > uclass. The device's bind() call is made last, so that it can do any > last-minute adjustments, and can rely on any uclass setup having > occurred. > > The 'bind' step does not rely on calling the device's bind(). In fact > the bind has already happened. This is just offering the device an > opportunity to do a little after-processing. I thought that the 'bind' step meant calling the drv->bind() method. In your explanation, it rather means manipulation of struct list_head etc. If so, "post_" is redundant, maybe? We have two handlers to give side effects of the 'bind' step. The global one is uc->uc_drv->bind() and the driver-specific one is drv->bind(). >> >> Likewise, when unbinding a device, >> "uc->uc_drv->pre_unbind()" is called *after* "drv->unbind()" >> so the name "post_unbind()" is more suitable than "pre_unbind()". >> > > Similar to the above. > >> >> >> I think pre_ and post_ is opposite here, and it looks confusing to me. >> >> Am I misunderstanding something? > > Do you have a need to change the ordering? No. The order should be kept as it is, I think. Perhaps it is less confusing to rename the handlers of uclass driver, but I am not sure if it is a good reason for the change. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
