Hello, Alexander. On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 09:48:26AM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > > If there are many which duplicate the above pattern, it'd probably be > > worthwhile to provide a helper? It's usually a good idea to reduce > > the amount of boilerplate code in drivers. > > I wanted to limit discussion in v1 to as little changes as possible. > I 'planned' those helper(s) for a separate effort if/when the most > important change is accepted and soaked a bit. The thing is doing it this way generates more churns and noises. Once the simpler ones live behind a wrapper which can be built on the existing interface, we can have both reduced cost and more latitude on the complex cases. > > If we do things this way, it breaks all drivers using this interface > > until they're converted, right? > > Right. And the rest of the series does it. Which breaks bisection which we shouldn't do. > > Also, it probably isn't the best idea > > to flip the behavior like this as this can go completely unnoticed (no > > compiler warning or anything, the same function just behaves > > differently). Maybe it'd be a better idea to introduce a simpler > > interface that most can be converted to? > > Well, an *other* interface is a good idea. What do you mean with the > simpler here? I'm still talking about a simpler wrapper for common cases, which is the important part anyway. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
