From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] RFC: Xen pad logic Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 20:24:42 -0400 Message-ID: <20120314002442.GC20363@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Liu, Jinsong" Cc: "lenb@kernel.org" , "Brown, Len" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Kernel development list , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "keir.xen@gmail.com" , Jan Beulich , "Li, Shaohua" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > +static struct acpi_driver xen_acpi_pad_driver = { > + .name = "processor_aggregator", > + .class = ACPI_PROCESSOR_AGGREGATOR_CLASS, > + .ids = xen_pad_device_ids, > + .ops = { > + .add = xen_acpi_pad_add, > + .remove = xen_acpi_pad_remove, > + }, > +}; > + > +static int __init xen_acpi_pad_init(void) > +{ > + return acpi_bus_register_driver(&xen_acpi_pad_driver); If the acpi_bus_register_driver function could work with multiple acpi_drivers that define the same class (and have some priority) would this be easier?