[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708120946590.2001@hadrien>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 09:52:28 +0200 (CEST)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, bhumirks@...il.com,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@...adcom.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] constify pci_error_handlers structures
On Sat, 12 Aug 2017, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 07:44:28AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > These pci_error_handlers structures are only stored in the err_handler
> > field of a pci_driver structure, and this field is declared as const. Thus
> > the pci_error_handlers structures can be const too.
> >
> > Done with the help of Coccinelle.
>
> If you're doing a scripted conversion of the pci_error_handlers
> structured I'd much rather see that structure killed off and folded
> into the pci_driver one.
OK, sure. So to be precise, you want the fields error_detected,
mmio_enabled, etc to be added as new fields to the pci_driver structure?
They both have a resume field, though. What should the pci_error_handlers
resume function be renamed to? Would resume_after_error be too much?
julia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists