From: "Peter Hüwe" <PeterHuewe@gmx.de>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
Cc: Kernel Janitors <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
"Digi International, Inc" <Eng.Linux@digi.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/25] char: Convert pci_table entries to PCI_VDEVICE (if PCI_ANY_ID is used)
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:07:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201007152307.35062.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100715204540.GB24463@suse.de>
Am Donnerstag 15 Juli 2010 22:45:40 schrieb Greg KH:
> The main reason I hate this macro, is that it now makes it almost
> impossible to grep for any users of the PCI_VENDOR_DIGI pci vendor id.
> I much prefer the PCI_DEVICE() macro instead, and as such, I'm not
> willing to take any of these patches, sorry.
No problem ;)
Patches are just proposals - nothing else.
The only question that remains is, do you see any point in converting the
patches to use PCI_DEVICE?
Since you have to address/set the .driver_data explicitly I guess there's no
point in doing it.
It's
{ PCI_VENDOR_DIGI, PCI_DEVICE_XRJ, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, brd_xrj },
vs.
{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_DIGI, PCI_DEVICE_XR), .driver_data=brd_xrj },
and I guess it isn't really an improvement.
Maybe there should be a version of PCI_DEVICE that addresses this issue?
But I have to admit, something like:
{ PCI_DEVICE_DD(PCI_VENDOR_ID_DIGI, PCI_DEVICE_XR), brd_xrj },
doesn't look that much better.
Thanks,
Peter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-15 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-15 18:52 [PATCH 12/25] char: Convert pci_table entries to PCI_VDEVICE (if PCI_ANY_ID is used) Peter Huewe
2010-07-15 20:45 ` Greg KH
2010-07-15 21:00 ` Joe Perches
2010-07-16 4:29 ` Greg KH
2010-07-16 4:44 ` Joe Perches
2010-07-16 5:29 ` Greg KH
2010-07-16 5:37 ` Joe Perches
2010-07-16 5:47 ` Greg KH
2010-07-15 21:07 ` Peter Hüwe [this message]
2010-07-16 4:28 ` Greg KH
2010-07-16 23:54 ` Peter Hüwe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201007152307.35062.PeterHuewe@gmx.de \
--to=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
--cc=Eng.Linux@digi.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox