On 21 September 2015 at 18:20, Michael Büsch <m@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:04:19 +0200
> Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> @@ -1464,6 +1463,12 @@ static int __init ssb_modinit(void)
>> /* don't fail SSB init because of this */
>> err = 0;
>> }
>> + err = ssb_host_pcmcia_init();
>> + if (err) {
>> + ssb_err("PCMCIA host initialization failed\n");
>> + /* don't fail SSB init because of this */
>
> Why not? What's the point of not failing here?
I just copied the logic from few lines above where we handle PCI init.
I guess the point was to support other host devices even is PCI host
registration fails.
>> +static const struct pcmcia_device_id ssb_host_pcmcia_tbl[] = {
>> + PCMCIA_DEVICE_MANF_CARD(0x2D0, 0x448),
>> + PCMCIA_DEVICE_MANF_CARD(0x2D0, 0x476),
>> + PCMCIA_DEVICE_NULL,
>> +};
>
> This doesn't belong into ssb'c pcmcia.c, IMO.
> It should be in a new file called b43_pcmcia_bridge.c, just like we have
> b43_pci_bridge.c.
> The bridge code technically (also for pci) doesn't belong into ssb. But
> it makes kconfig simpler.
This is something I don't understand. This PCI bridge was also always
confusing me.
Why do we want a separated file for that? What's wrong with having 1
file for host (PCI/PCMCIA) driver (probe and remove functions) *and*
ssb initialization?
--
Rafał
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
