* Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> I'm sorry, but I forgot to tell you one important thing. Now we
> are trying to change pci slot management API to setup
> pci_slot->hotplug. We must consider how to implement the
> counterpart to clean up pci_slot->hotplug at the same time. My
> current idea is adding hotplug arg to pci_destroy_slot(), but
> it seems a little ugly...
Ugh, I'm not sure which is worse, an unbalanced API vs passing a
hotplug_slot to pci_destroy_slot.
pci_destroy_slot should never touch the pci_slot->hotplug
argument, I think, because it is possible for non-hotplug callers
to call pci_create_slot.
I think the rule should just be:
- all hotplug drivers must use pci_hp_register/deregister
- hotplug drivers must pass a valid hotplug_slot argument
- all detection drivers must use pci_create/destroy_slot
- detection drivers must pass NULL for hotplug_slot
If you prefer, we could wrap pci_create_slot for detection
drivers:
struct pci_slot *pci_slot_register(struct pci_bus *parent, int slot_nr,
const char *name)
{
return pci_create_slot(parent, slot_nr, name, NULL);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_slot_register);
And then do not export pci_create_slot().
Hm?
/ac
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
