On 7/18/2025 12:00 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 08:41:33AM GMT, Mario Limonciello wrote:
From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
When compiled without CONFIG_VIDEO pci_create_boot_display_file() will
never create a sysfs file for boot_display. Guard the sysfs file
declaration against CONFIG_VIDEO.
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20250718224118.5b3f22b0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
index 6b1a0ae254d3a..f6540a72204d3 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
@@ -680,12 +680,14 @@ const struct attribute_group *pcibus_groups[] = {
NULL,
};
+#ifdef CONFIG_VIDEO
static ssize_t boot_display_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
char *buf)
{
return sysfs_emit(buf, "1\n");
}
static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(boot_display);
I failed to give my comment during the offending series itself, but it is never
late than never. Why are we adding non-PCI attributes under bus/pci in the first
place? Though the underlying device uses PCI as a transport, only the PCI bus
specific attrbutes should be placed under bus/pci and the driver/peripheral
specific attrbutes should belong to the respective bus/class/device hierarchy.
Now, if other peripherals (like netdev) start adding these device specific
attributes under bus/pci, it will turn out to be a mess.
- Mani
It was mostly to mirror the location of where boot_vga is, which
arguably has the same issue you raise.
I would be incredibly surprised if there was a proposal to add a
'boot_display' attribute from netdev..
