[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1323784516.1455.2.camel@leonhard>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:55:16 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] PM / Sleep: Make pm_op() and pm_noirq_op() return
callback pointers
2011-12-13 (화), 00:53 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki:
> On Monday, December 12, 2011, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw <at> sisk.pl> writes:
> >
> > >
> > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw <at> sisk.pl>
> > >
> > > Make the pm_op() and pm_noirq_op() functions return pointers to
> > > appropriate callbacks instead of executing those callbacks and
> > > returning their results.
> > >
> > > This change is required for a subsequent modification that will
> > > execute the corresponding driver callback if the subsystem
> > > callback returned by either pm_op(), or pm_noirq_op() is NULL.
> > >
> >
> > Hello Rafael,
> >
> > How about typedef'ing something like pm_callback_t for readability?
> >
> > typedef int (*pm_callback_t)(struct device *);
> >
> > This way, the code will be easier to read.
>
> Do you mean something like in the patch below? It does look a bit simpler.
>
Yes, indeed. The patch looks better to me. :)
Thanks,
Namhyung Kim
--
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