From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:47938 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932939Ab1ERM0s convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 May 2011 08:26:48 -0400 Received: by iyb14 with SMTP id 14so1239916iyb.19 for ; Wed, 18 May 2011 05:26:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1305677203-16660-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <1305677203-16660-2-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> From: Julian Calaby Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 22:26:28 +1000 Message-ID: (sfid-20110518_142651_923373_CA368D88) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] b43: add bus device abstraction layer To: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Rafa=B3_Mi=B3ecki?= Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , b43-dev@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2011/5/18 Rafał Miłecki : > W dniu 18 maja 2011 09:21 użytkownik Julian Calaby > napisał: >> As I see it, having two sets of mostly identical  wrapper functions in >> a file seems incorrect to me. Especially as once the abstraction is >> complete it would technically be correct to build b43 without SSB >> support - it's much cleaner to not compile a file than have a massive >> #ifdef block in a common file. >> >> Anyway, it's only a minor thing. > > Massive? It's *one* ifdef for one bus type in this file. I count massive by the amount of code within the block, not the number of ifdefs. >>> 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? >> >> While I try to read every patch that passes through the linux-wireless >> mailing list, I only skim them, and tend to miss some details. The >> thing that prompted this comment was the SSB comment at the start of >> the SSB specific wrappers - something I probably didn't read the last >> two times the patch came up on the list. > > OK, I ask because it's much easier to discuss such a things before you > got 20 patches. That's why I posted very early RFC. I know, I completely understand. This was just a small query. If it had jumped out at me earlier, I would have commented then. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ .Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/