Re: [PATCH]: first proposal for pci resume quirk interface

[Alan]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 15:20:41 +0000
Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> Looks okay to me.
> 
> 
> >  #define DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_ENABLE(vendor, device, hook)			\
> >  	DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_SECTION(.pci_fixup_enable,			\
> >  			vendor##device##hook, vendor, device, hook)
> > +#define DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_RESUME(vendor, device, hook)			\
> > +	DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_SECTION(.pci_fixup_resume,			\
> > +			resume##vendor##device##hook, vendor, device, hook)
> 
> Maybe having DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_ALWAYS (meaning ENABLE+RESUME)  would reduce the code
> duplication?

There is almost no duplication if you actually look at the output of the
code. It simply generates entries into two jump/match tables. Doing a
PCI_FIXUP for both is ugly because of the ordering requirements.

Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/