On Monday 02 November 2009, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> Hey,
>
> just two minor nit-pick which we could handle post-2.6.32:
>
> > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/pcmcia/cs.c
> > @@ -98,10 +98,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(pcmcia_socket_list_rwsem);
> > * These functions check for the appropriate struct pcmcia_soket arrays,
> > * and pass them to the low-level functions pcmcia_{suspend,resume}_socket
>
> ... some documentation of the new functions, especially whether other socket
> drivers should be updated?
OK, I'll post a separate patch for that for .33.
> > -static int socket_resume(struct pcmcia_socket *skt)
> > +static void socket_start_resume(struct pcmcia_socket *skt)
> > {
> > - int ret;
> > -
> > - if (!(skt->state & SOCKET_SUSPEND))
> > - return -EBUSY;
> > -
> > skt->socket = dead_socket;
> > skt->ops->init(skt);
> > skt->ops->set_socket(skt, &skt->socket);
> > + if (skt->state & SOCKET_PRESENT)
> > + skt->resume_status = socket_setup(skt, resume_delay);
> > +}
> >
> > +static int socket_early_resume(struct pcmcia_socket *skt)
> > +{
> > + socket_start_resume(skt);
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> Why do we need to have two functions doing the same? Wouldn't
>
> static int socket_early_resume(...)
>
> suffice, with the only call to socket_start_resume() being replaced with
> socket_early_resume()?
Yes, it would. I'll do that in the final version of the patch.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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
