On Monday 19 May 2008 04:01:32 pm Rene Herman wrote: > On 06-05-08 00:36, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > We used pnp_resource.index to keep track of which ISAPNP configuration > > register a resource should be written to. We needed this only to > > handle the case where a register is disabled but a subsequent register > > in the same set is enabled. > > > > Rather than explicitly maintaining the pnp_resource.index, this patch > > adds a resource every time we read an ISAPNP configuration register > > and marks the resource as IORESOURCE_DISABLED when appropriate. This > > makes the position in the pnp_resource_table always correspond to the > > config register index. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@xxxxxx> > > > - pnp_res = pnp_add_io_resource(dev, start, end, > > - 0); > > - if (pnp_res) > > - pnp_res->index = nport++; > > + pnp_add_io_resource(dev, start, end, 0); > > In the tree after your v2 series, pnp_add_foo_resource() are called as > void functions yet still return a struct pnp_resource *. You might have > other plans but if not, I guess they can _be_ void functions? You're right, I still don't do anything with the return value. It could be used to check for success/failure, but we currently don't do that. Possibly a future cleanup since there's no functional problem here. Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
