From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?windows-1252?Q?J=FCrgen_Gro=DF?= <jgross@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] xen: remove DEFINE_XENBUS_DRIVER() macro
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 05:59:28 +0200
Message-ID: <54111E20.9050901@suse.com>
References: <1410350869-21277-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>	<20140910160043.GH12893@laptop.dumpdata.com>
	<54107B84.7070005@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <jgross@suse.com>) id 1XRvXf-0006dl-FV
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 03:59:31 +0000
In-Reply-To: <54107B84.7070005@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 09/10/2014 06:25 PM, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 10/09/14 17:00, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 01:07:49PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
>>> The DEFINE_XENBUS_DRIVER() macro looks a bit weird and causes sparse
>>> errors.
>>
>> .. but it is also useful for downstream distros to bolt on Xen patches.
>>
>> Is this urgent? Could it wait until Novell/SuSE has switched over
>> to using pvops and then this can go in?
>
> If the macro didn't cause sparse errors, I could be persuaded to wait.

Couldn't you modify the current macro users to avoid the sparse errors?
E.g. by explicitly specifying the second argument as "NULL" when the
default is desired?

Removing the "+ 0" from evaluation of "drvname" in the macro definition
would enforce specifying "drvname".

Juergen

>
> I do not think we should avoid fixing bugs or improving the readability
> or maintainability of the code to help out someone still using
> non-upstream Xen support.
>
> In general, the cost of maintaining non-upstream forks should not be
> paid for by upstream users/developers.
>
> David
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>