From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH for 4.6 07/13] xen: Introduce a generic way to describe device Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:07:28 +0000 Message-ID: <5492FBC0.9070405@linaro.org> References: <1418760534-18163-1-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org> <1418760534-18163-8-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org> <549165F102000078000502B8@mail.emea.novell.com> <54915B3E.4010702@linaro.org> <54916CFA020000780005032F@mail.emea.novell.com> <54917F29.8070901@linaro.org> <5491BAB902000078000C40C6@mail.emea.novell.com> <5492F919.2010701@linaro.org> <549308A90200007800050BF8@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Y1dby-0000pS-C4 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:07:34 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id r20so2081476wiv.0 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:07:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <549308A90200007800050BF8@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: keir@xen.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com, manish.jaggi@caviumnetworks.com, tim@xen.org, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 18/12/2014 16:02, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 18.12.14 at 16:56, wrote: >> On 17/12/2014 17:17, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> Aliasing device and pci_dev for x86 would yield similar clarity afaict. >> >> To be sure, by aliasing you mean creating a typedef? >> >> For x86: >> typedef struct pci_dev device_t; >> >> And for ARM: >> typedef struct device device_t; > > Yes, I think that's the only reasonable thing. Using a #define would > seem ugly no matter which direction you did it. Right. We have some place where device and pci_device are used as variable. It would have introduced some strange compilation error. I will go ahead with this solution. Regards, -- Julien Grall