From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 09:01:30 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/9] b43: add bus device abstraction layer In-Reply-To: References: <1305677203-16660-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <1305677203-16660-2-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Julian Calaby Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , b43-dev@lists.infradead.org W dniu 18 maja 2011 02:28 u?ytkownik Julian Calaby napisa?: > Rafa?, > > A quick question: > > 2011/5/18 Rafa? Mi?ecki : >> >> Signed-off-by: Rafa? Mi?ecki >> --- >> ?drivers/net/wireless/b43/Makefile | ? ?1 + >> ?drivers/net/wireless/b43/b43.h ? ?| ? ?4 +++- >> ?drivers/net/wireless/b43/bus.c ? ?| ? 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Would it make more sense to have this be called ssb.c as it contains > all the ssb specific functions, It's only ssb specific for now. It will contain BCMA code later. > that way you can then have an brcma.c > file to contain the functions specific to that bus? I'll put BCMA specific code in bus.c. Right now bus.c contains 100 LOC* and I believe its SSB part is complete. All the ops functions are one liners. It's so small and simple file I don't see sense to splitting it and having more mess in list of files instead. A one quick question: Why didn't you respond in "[RFC][PATCH] b43: add bus abstraction layer" on 2011-04-08? Or more recent "[RFC ONLY 2/5] b43: add bus device abstraction later" posted on 2011-05-09? * 100 LOC without GPL header, but including /includes/ and empty lines. -- Rafa?