Re: [Pcihpd-discuss] [PATCH 5/6]: hotplug/ia64: SN Hotplug Driver

[Prarit Bhargava <prarit@sgi.com>]

Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 11:41:01AM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> 
>>Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
>>
>>>>+	sprintf(bss_hotplug_slot->name, "module_%c%c%c%c%.2d_b_%d_s_%d",
>>>>+	 '0'+RACK_GET_CLASS(MODULE_GET_RACK(pcibus_info->pbi_moduleid)),
>>>>+	 '0'+RACK_GET_GROUP(MODULE_GET_RACK(pcibus_info->pbi_moduleid)),
>>>>+		'0'+RACK_GET_NUM(MODULE_GET_RACK(pcibus_info->pbi_moduleid)),
>>>>+		MODULE_GET_BTCHAR(pcibus_info->pbi_moduleid),
>>>>+		MODULE_GET_BPOS(pcibus_info->pbi_moduleid),
>>>>+		((int)pcibus_info->pbi_buscommon.bs_persist_busnum) & 0xf,
>>>>+		device + 1);
>>>
>>>
>>>*eek* Sorry, but that looks really ugly. Wouldn't it be enough do name it 
>>>like the device that would be in slot, something like DOMAIN_BUS_SLOT and 
>>>maybe one extra number?
>>
>>Unfortunately, yes, the longer name is prefered in this case.  The rack 
>>class
>>ID, etc., are need to identify locations on the Altix platform.
> 
> 
> No, use additional sysfs files if you need to export this kind of
> information to the user somehow.  I think IBM already does this in their
> drivers in a sane manner (so you might want to copy them, as they have
> already modified the userspace code to handle those sysfs files...)
> 
> 

Okay -- I'll go with Eike's suggestion above.  D_B_S + 1 number.

>>>>+	if (action = PCI_REQ_SLOT_ELIGIBLE && rc = PCI_SLOT_ALREADY_DOWN) {
>>>
>>>I would feel better if you add extra braces around the tests, but I'm 
>>>probably just a bit paranoid about this things. Greg?
>>
>>I was asked to remove the braces in an earlier version.  I too would prefer
>>to have them but am going with current comments on the code.
> 
> 
> Who asked you to remove the extra braces?  It was not me.  If you like
> them, please add them, I feel more comfortable with them too.
> 

Hrmm ... I can't remember.  But someone did definately tell me that they were 
not required.

P.