[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4EF327E2020000780006993E@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 11:51:46 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: "Ian Campbell" <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
Cc: "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad@...nok.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"dmitry.torokhov@...il.com" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
"FlorianSchandinat@....de" <FlorianSchandinat@....de>,
"Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@...p.org>,
"Jens Axboe" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, v2] Xen: consolidate and simplify struct
xenbus_driver instantiation
>>> On 22.12.11 at 10:57, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-22 at 09:08 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> The 'name', 'owner', and 'mod_name' members are redundant with the
>> identically named fields in the 'driver' sub-structure. Rather than
>> switching each instance to specify these fields explicitly, introduce
>> a macro to simplify this.
>>
>> Eliminate further redundancy by allowing the drvname argument to
>> DEFINE_XENBUS_DRIVER() to be blank (in which case the first entry from
>> the ID table will be used for .driver.name).
>
> Any reason not to always use DRV_NAME here (which is generally a bit
> more specific e.g. "xen-foofront" rather than "foo") and rely on the id
> table for the shorter names used in xenstore?
That would imply that DRV_NAME is always defined, but I don't
see this being the case.
Jan
--
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