[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201007152307.35062.PeterHuewe@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:07:34 +0200
From: Peter Hüwe <PeterHuewe@....de>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc: Kernel Janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
"Digi International, Inc" <Eng.Linux@...i.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/25] char: Convert pci_table entries to PCI_VDEVICE (if PCI_ANY_ID is used)
Am Donnerstag 15 Juli 2010 22:45:40 schrieb Greg KH:
> The main reason I hate this macro, is that it now makes it almost
> impossible to grep for any users of the PCI_VENDOR_DIGI pci vendor id.
> I much prefer the PCI_DEVICE() macro instead, and as such, I'm not
> willing to take any of these patches, sorry.
No problem ;)
Patches are just proposals - nothing else.
The only question that remains is, do you see any point in converting the
patches to use PCI_DEVICE?
Since you have to address/set the .driver_data explicitly I guess there's no
point in doing it.
It's
{ PCI_VENDOR_DIGI, PCI_DEVICE_XRJ, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, brd_xrj },
vs.
{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_DIGI, PCI_DEVICE_XR), .driver_data=brd_xrj },
and I guess it isn't really an improvement.
Maybe there should be a version of PCI_DEVICE that addresses this issue?
But I have to admit, something like:
{ PCI_DEVICE_DD(PCI_VENDOR_ID_DIGI, PCI_DEVICE_XR), brd_xrj },
doesn't look that much better.
Thanks,
Peter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists