Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > There are no implementations of ->set_power() or ->get_power(), are > there? If not, we can just remove them and the calls to them. > > I don't see why we should add SLOT_ENABLED. Are not implementations of set_power() and get_power(). I removed this funcions and in enable_slot(), disable_slot() and cpci_get_power_status() I use a `flags` field that I create in cpci_hp_controller_ops struct. I created this `flags` for store a power_status and use this in enable_slot(), disable_slot() and cpci_get_power_status() that before uses a set_power() and get_power(). I do this way, because I seeing this patter in another pci subsystems. In adittion on this, the flags can be used for store anothers values. But the Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> say: "If neither get_power nor set_power where defined in any driver, then cpci_get_power_status() was always returning 1. IIUC, now it may return 1 or 0 depending of if enable_slot() or disable_slot() have been called." Do you think that is better we only return 1 in pci_get_power_status() and remove SLOT_ENABLED and `flags` field? Thanks, Guilherme
