On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:07:34PM +0200, Peter H?we wrote:
> 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.
It's a bit nicer, yes. But only do it if you want to.
> 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.
You can do:
{ PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_DIGI, PCI_DEVICE_XR), brd_xrj },
just fine today, so do that if you want to.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
