Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> Indeed. socket->pcmcia_socket (old) == socket->cls_d.s_info[0] (new)
If this is true...
> @@ -230,14 +230,16 @@
> static int cardbus_suspend (struct pci_dev *dev, u32 state)
> {
> pci_socket_t *socket = pci_get_drvdata(dev);
> - pcmcia_suspend_socket (socket->pcmcia_socket);
> + if (socket && socket->cls_d.s_info[0])
> + pcmcia_suspend_socket (socket->cls_d.s_info[0]);
> return 0;
> }
>
> static int cardbus_resume (struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> pci_socket_t *socket = pci_get_drvdata(dev);
> - pcmcia_resume_socket (socket->pcmcia_socket);
> + if (socket && socket->cls_d.s_info[0])
> + pcmcia_resume_socket (socket->cls_d.s_info[0]);
> return 0;
> }
1) ...why do you bother checking for NULL? Isn't NULL indicative of a
BUG(), instead?
2) why are multiple s_info records allocated, when you hardcode use of
record #0 ?
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 22:00:21 EST