Re: [RFC/PATCH] Per-device parameter support (11/16)

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 13:30 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>  dp_11_module_param_arr.diff
> 
>  This is the 11st patch of 16 patches for devparam.
> 
>  The unsigned int * @nump of module_param_array is changed back to
> unsigned int @num, and new sets of macros named module_param_arr*()
> are added.  These new macros don't take the num argument.  This change
> is made for two reasons
> 
>  1. To be consistent with devparam macros.  In devparam, we'll be
>     using field name of struct elements, so we won't be able to use
>     pointer argument.
>  2. It's more consistent with other moduleparam macros.
> 
>  This patch only modifies moduleparam.h and doesn't modify the users
> of the modified macros.  The next patch takes care of that.  This and
> the next patch (dp_12_module_param_arr_apply.diff) are optional.

It's finely balanced, but the module_param macro only skips the "&"
because it turns it into a name.  module_param_named() should probably
be changed to take a ptr too.  But you'll get a warning if you use the
interface wrong, so it's not a huge issue.

The balance is tipped here I think because the massive number of
functions we're starting to sprout into.

Rusty.
-- 
A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver -- Richard Braakman