Re: [PATCH 3/3] PNP cleanups - Version 2 - Pass struct pnp_dev topnp_clean_resource_table for cleanup reasons

[Alan Cox]

> > in the pnp_dev. That is, the resources are tied to the device, with struct 
> > pnp_resource_table being no more than a handy container to group them under 
> > a single name.
> Putting the count into struct resource does not make sense.

Can you explain that claim ?

> The idea is to not rely on the exact pnp resource table structure and
> abstracting this to macros. If krealloc approach works,
> dev->res.port_resource[i].start would even still work, if not, it's
> easier to alter the pnp resource table and the macros internally.

Externally in drivers yes. Internally in code no - it makes the code
harder to work with.

> > Yes, I dont know how he intends to deal with this (nor, in fact, just how 
> > dynamic things are supposed to end up to begin with) so over to Thomas.
> Krealloc should only get used at early pnp init time, when the BIOS
> structures are parsed. The devices shouldn't be active then...
> A bit of a problem, as said, could be the sysfs interfaces, there it
> must be insured krealloc is not used anymore.

I don't think its that simple but that can be dealt with one the changes
are in place if the objects are sensibly laid out.

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/