From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752869Ab3LBDzz (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Dec 2013 22:55:55 -0500 Received: from mail.active-venture.com ([67.228.131.205]:61412 "EHLO mail.active-venture.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752439Ab3LBDzx (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Dec 2013 22:55:53 -0500 X-Originating-IP: 108.223.40.66 Message-ID: <529C04C7.9050506@roeck-us.net> Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 19:55:51 -0800 From: Guenter Roeck User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jingoo Han CC: "'Joe Perches'" , "'Greg Kroah-Hartman'" , "'Bjorn Helgaas'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, "'Andrew Morton'" , "'Andy Whitcroft'" , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] serial: 8250_pci: use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro References: <000601ceebdc$ee148de0$ca3da9a0$%han@samsung.com> <20131128040750.GA29917@kroah.com> <006001ceebfa$c85a1020$590e3060$%han@samsung.com> <1385617213.12210.5.camel@joe-AO722> <20131128055328.GA565@kroah.com> <1385619863.12210.14.camel@joe-AO722> <529C026E.2000302@roeck-us.net> <000f01ceef11$a14acf00$e3e06d00$%han@samsung.com> In-Reply-To: <000f01ceef11$a14acf00$e3e06d00$%han@samsung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/01/2013 07:50 PM, Jingoo Han wrote: > On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:46 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote: >>> On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote: >>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote: >>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote: >>>>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't >>>>>>>>> use it in more places. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm >>>>>>>>> not going to take these patches. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (+cc Joe Perches, Andrew Morton, Andy Whitcroft) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Joe Perches, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Would you fix checkpatch.pl about DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE? >>>>>>>> Currently, checkpatch.pl guides to use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE >>>>>>>> as below. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id >>>>>>>> #331: FILE: drivers/usb/host/ehci-pci.c:331: >>>>>>>> +static const struct pci_device_id pci_ids [] = { { >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However, Greg Kroah-Hartman mentioned that DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE >>>>>>>> shouldn't be used anymore. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, would you change checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use >>>>>>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For example, >>>>>>>> WARNING: Use struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The documentation doesn't agree with Greg. >>>>> [] >>>>>> I say just remove it, I should have done that years ago when I was the >>>>>> PCI maintainer, just never got around to it. No other bus has something >>>>>> like this for their device ids, why should PCI be "special"? >>>>> >>>>> Anyone else have an opinion? >>>>> >>>>> I don't care one way or another, but please, one way >>>>> not two. >>>> >> >> Same here. >> >>>> (+cc Bjorn Helgaas, linux-pci) >>>> >>>> Then, how about the following steps? >>>> >>>> 1. Fix ./Documentation/PCI/pci.txt as below. >>>> (Jingoo Han) >>>> The ID table is an array of struct pci_device_id entries ending with an >>>> -all-zero entry; use of the macro DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE is the preferred >>>> -method of declaring the table. Each entry consists of: >>>> +all-zero entry; Each entry consists of: >>>> >>>> 2. Fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use >>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE. >>>> (Joe Perches) >>> >>> If all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs are replaced with 'const struct pci_device_id' >>> and these patches are merged through 'driver-core.git', it will be not >>> necessary to fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl. >>> >> Why not ? > > I will replace all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs with 'const struct pci_device_id', > and remove the definition of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro. > > --- a/include/linux/pci.h > +++ b/include/linux/pci.h > @@ -631,16 +631,6 @@ struct pci_driver { > #define to_pci_driver(drv) container_of(drv, struct pci_driver, driver) > > /** > - * DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE - macro used to describe a pci device table > - * @_table: device table name > - * > - * This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array (a device table) > - * in a generic manner. > - */ > -#define DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(_table) \ > - const struct pci_device_id _table[] > - > -/** > > In this case, there is no DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE usage > in the kernel. If someone uses DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro, > it will make build error. > And that will make the checkpatch warning go away ? That seems to be very unlikely. Guenter