From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Vrabel Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: remove DEFINE_XENBUS_DRIVER() macro Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 10:53:57 +0100 Message-ID: <540ECE35.10503@citrix.com> References: <1410194802-2848-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com> <540EE58D020000780003275B@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XRI7e-0004IB-Q2 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2014 09:54:02 +0000 In-Reply-To: <540EE58D020000780003275B@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Boris Ostrovsky List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 09/09/14 10:33, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 08.09.14 at 18:46, wrote: >> The DEFINE_XENBUS_DRIVER() macro looks a bit weird and causes sparse >> errors. >> >> Replace the uses with standard structure definitions instead. This is >> similar to pci and usb device registration. >> >> Signed-off-by: David Vrabel > > I really regret you doing this, re-adding redundancy the elimination > of which the macro got added for (the diffstat would look even less > favorable if your patch didn't eliminate a couple of bogus comments > and blank lines). I'm certainly not in the position to nack this patch, > but if I was I would. There didn't seem to be a good reason to require that the driver name match the first device ID. What should the driver be named if it was for two or more different types of Xenbus device? And not all drivers did this anyway. However, we could do: drv->driver.name = drv->name ? drv->name : drv->ids[0]; What that resolve your concern? David