From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751834AbWG0AWA (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 20:22:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751835AbWG0AWA (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 20:22:00 -0400 Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:28810 "EHLO perch.kroah.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751834AbWG0AWA (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 20:22:00 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:20:09 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Multi-threaded device probing Message-ID: <20060727002009.GA9390@suse.de> References: <20060725203028.GA1270@kroah.com> <200607270202.00854.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200607270202.00854.arnd@arndb.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 02:02:00AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:30, Greg KH wrote: > > --- gregkh-2.6.orig/include/linux/device.h > > +++ gregkh-2.6/include/linux/device.h > > @@ -105,6 +105,8 @@ struct device_driver { > > ????????void????(*shutdown)?????(struct device * dev); > > ????????int?????(*suspend)??????(struct device * dev, pm_message_t state); > > ????????int?????(*resume)???????(struct device * dev); > > + > > +???????unsigned int multithread_probe:1; > > ?}; > > ? > > Why use a bit field here? It ends up consuming sizeof(long) anyway > and causes more complex code, with no obvious benefit. Because we don't yet have a boolean type :) Honestly, I don't really care, I can make it a char if people really care (but due to padding, it would take up the same size as unsigned long anyway...) thanks, greg k-h