diff mbox

[1/5] serial: 8250_pci: use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro

Message ID 000f01ceef11$a14acf00$e3e06d00$%han@samsung.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Delegated to: Bjorn Helgaas
Headers show

Commit Message

Jingoo Han Dec. 2, 2013, 3:50 a.m. UTC
On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:46 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't
> >>>>>>> use it in more places.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm
> >>>>>>> not going to take these patches.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (+cc Joe Perches, Andrew Morton, Andy Whitcroft)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Joe Perches,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Would you fix checkpatch.pl about DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> >>>>>> Currently, checkpatch.pl guides to use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>> as below.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>    WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id
> >>>>>>    #331: FILE: drivers/usb/host/ehci-pci.c:331:
> >>>>>>    +static const struct pci_device_id pci_ids [] = { {
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> However, Greg Kroah-Hartman mentioned that DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>> shouldn't be used anymore.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So, would you change checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> >>>>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For example,
> >>>>>>    WARNING: Use struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The documentation doesn't agree with Greg.
> >>> []
> >>>> I say just remove it, I should have done that years ago when I was the
> >>>> PCI maintainer, just never got around to it.  No other bus has something
> >>>> like this for their device ids, why should PCI be "special"?
> >>>
> >>> Anyone else have an opinion?
> >>>
> >>> I don't care one way or another, but please, one way
> >>> not two.
> >>
> 
> Same here.
> 
> >> (+cc Bjorn Helgaas, linux-pci)
> >>
> >> Then, how about the following steps?
> >>
> >> 1. Fix ./Documentation/PCI/pci.txt as below.
> >>     (Jingoo Han)
> >>     The ID table is an array of struct pci_device_id entries ending with an
> >>     -all-zero entry; use of the macro DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE is the preferred
> >>     -method of declaring the table.  Each entry consists of:
> >>     +all-zero entry; Each entry consists of:
> >>
> >> 2. Fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> >>      struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE.
> >>      (Joe Perches)
> >
> > If all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs are replaced with 'const struct pci_device_id'
> > and these patches are merged through 'driver-core.git', it will be not
> > necessary to fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl.
> >
> Why not ?

I will replace all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs with 'const struct pci_device_id',
and remove the definition of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro.

it will make  build error.

Best regards,
Jingoo Han

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Guenter Roeck Dec. 2, 2013, 3:55 a.m. UTC | #1
On 12/01/2013 07:50 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:46 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>> On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't
>>>>>>>>> use it in more places.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm
>>>>>>>>> not going to take these patches.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (+cc Joe Perches, Andrew Morton, Andy Whitcroft)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Joe Perches,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would you fix checkpatch.pl about DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
>>>>>>>> Currently, checkpatch.pl guides to use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
>>>>>>>> as below.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id
>>>>>>>>     #331: FILE: drivers/usb/host/ehci-pci.c:331:
>>>>>>>>     +static const struct pci_device_id pci_ids [] = { {
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, Greg Kroah-Hartman mentioned that DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
>>>>>>>> shouldn't be used anymore.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, would you change checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
>>>>>>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For example,
>>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The documentation doesn't agree with Greg.
>>>>> []
>>>>>> I say just remove it, I should have done that years ago when I was the
>>>>>> PCI maintainer, just never got around to it.  No other bus has something
>>>>>> like this for their device ids, why should PCI be "special"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone else have an opinion?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't care one way or another, but please, one way
>>>>> not two.
>>>>
>>
>> Same here.
>>
>>>> (+cc Bjorn Helgaas, linux-pci)
>>>>
>>>> Then, how about the following steps?
>>>>
>>>> 1. Fix ./Documentation/PCI/pci.txt as below.
>>>>      (Jingoo Han)
>>>>      The ID table is an array of struct pci_device_id entries ending with an
>>>>      -all-zero entry; use of the macro DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE is the preferred
>>>>      -method of declaring the table.  Each entry consists of:
>>>>      +all-zero entry; Each entry consists of:
>>>>
>>>> 2. Fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
>>>>       struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE.
>>>>       (Joe Perches)
>>>
>>> If all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs are replaced with 'const struct pci_device_id'
>>> and these patches are merged through 'driver-core.git', it will be not
>>> necessary to fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl.
>>>
>> Why not ?
>
> I will replace all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs with 'const struct pci_device_id',
> and remove the definition of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro.
>
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -631,16 +631,6 @@ struct pci_driver {
>   #define        to_pci_driver(drv) container_of(drv, struct pci_driver, driver)
>
>   /**
> - * DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE - macro used to describe a pci device table
> - * @_table: device table name
> - *
> - * This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array (a device table)
> - * in a generic manner.
> - */
> -#define DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(_table) \
> -       const struct pci_device_id _table[]
> -
> -/**
>
> In this case, there is no DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE usage
> in the kernel. If someone uses DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro,
> it will make  build error.
>

And that will make the checkpatch warning go away ?
That seems to be very unlikely.

Guenter

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Jingoo Han Dec. 2, 2013, 4:03 a.m. UTC | #2
On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:56 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 12/01/2013 07:50 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:46 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>> On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't
> >>>>>>>>> use it in more places.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm
> >>>>>>>>> not going to take these patches.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> (+cc Joe Perches, Andrew Morton, Andy Whitcroft)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Joe Perches,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Would you fix checkpatch.pl about DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> >>>>>>>> Currently, checkpatch.pl guides to use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>>>> as below.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id
> >>>>>>>>     #331: FILE: drivers/usb/host/ehci-pci.c:331:
> >>>>>>>>     +static const struct pci_device_id pci_ids [] = { {
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> However, Greg Kroah-Hartman mentioned that DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>>>> shouldn't be used anymore.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So, would you change checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> >>>>>>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For example,
> >>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The documentation doesn't agree with Greg.
> >>>>> []
> >>>>>> I say just remove it, I should have done that years ago when I was the
> >>>>>> PCI maintainer, just never got around to it.  No other bus has something
> >>>>>> like this for their device ids, why should PCI be "special"?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Anyone else have an opinion?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't care one way or another, but please, one way
> >>>>> not two.
> >>>>
> >>
> >> Same here.
> >>
> >>>> (+cc Bjorn Helgaas, linux-pci)
> >>>>
> >>>> Then, how about the following steps?
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. Fix ./Documentation/PCI/pci.txt as below.
> >>>>      (Jingoo Han)
> >>>>      The ID table is an array of struct pci_device_id entries ending with an
> >>>>      -all-zero entry; use of the macro DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE is the preferred
> >>>>      -method of declaring the table.  Each entry consists of:
> >>>>      +all-zero entry; Each entry consists of:
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. Fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> >>>>       struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE.
> >>>>       (Joe Perches)
> >>>
> >>> If all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs are replaced with 'const struct pci_device_id'
> >>> and these patches are merged through 'driver-core.git', it will be not
> >>> necessary to fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl.
> >>>
> >> Why not ?
> >
> > I will replace all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs with 'const struct pci_device_id',
> > and remove the definition of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro.
> >
> > --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> > @@ -631,16 +631,6 @@ struct pci_driver {
> >   #define        to_pci_driver(drv) container_of(drv, struct pci_driver, driver)
> >
> >   /**
> > - * DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE - macro used to describe a pci device table
> > - * @_table: device table name
> > - *
> > - * This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array (a device table)
> > - * in a generic manner.
> > - */
> > -#define DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(_table) \
> > -       const struct pci_device_id _table[]
> > -
> > -/**
> >
> > In this case, there is no DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE usage
> > in the kernel. If someone uses DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro,
> > it will make  build error.
> >
> 
> And that will make the checkpatch warning go away ?
> That seems to be very unlikely.

OK, I will ask Joe Perches to remove the following checkpatch
warning.

    WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id

Best regards,
Jingoo Han

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Joe Perches Dec. 2, 2013, 5:48 a.m. UTC | #3
(Adding Jonas Bonn to list as he added the macro in the first place...)

On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 13:03 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:56 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 12/01/2013 07:50 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > > On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:46 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > >> On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > >>> On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > >>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > >>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't
> > >>>>>>>>> use it in more places.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm
> > >>>>>>>>> not going to take these patches.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> (+cc Joe Perches, Andrew Morton, Andy Whitcroft)
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Hi Joe Perches,
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Would you fix checkpatch.pl about DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> > >>>>>>>> Currently, checkpatch.pl guides to use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> > >>>>>>>> as below.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id
> > >>>>>>>>     #331: FILE: drivers/usb/host/ehci-pci.c:331:
> > >>>>>>>>     +static const struct pci_device_id pci_ids [] = { {
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> However, Greg Kroah-Hartman mentioned that DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> > >>>>>>>> shouldn't be used anymore.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> So, would you change checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> > >>>>>>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> For example,
> > >>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> The documentation doesn't agree with Greg.
> > >>>>> []
> > >>>>>> I say just remove it, I should have done that years ago when I was the
> > >>>>>> PCI maintainer, just never got around to it.  No other bus has something
> > >>>>>> like this for their device ids, why should PCI be "special"?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Anyone else have an opinion?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I don't care one way or another, but please, one way
> > >>>>> not two.
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > >> Same here.
> > >>
> > >>>> (+cc Bjorn Helgaas, linux-pci)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Then, how about the following steps?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 1. Fix ./Documentation/PCI/pci.txt as below.
> > >>>>      (Jingoo Han)
> > >>>>      The ID table is an array of struct pci_device_id entries ending with an
> > >>>>      -all-zero entry; use of the macro DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE is the preferred
> > >>>>      -method of declaring the table.  Each entry consists of:
> > >>>>      +all-zero entry; Each entry consists of:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 2. Fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> > >>>>       struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE.
> > >>>>       (Joe Perches)
> > >>>
> > >>> If all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs are replaced with 'const struct pci_device_id'
> > >>> and these patches are merged through 'driver-core.git', it will be not
> > >>> necessary to fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl.
> > >>>
> > >> Why not ?
> > >
> > > I will replace all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs with 'const struct pci_device_id',
> > > and remove the definition of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro.
> > >
> > > --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> > > @@ -631,16 +631,6 @@ struct pci_driver {
> > >   #define        to_pci_driver(drv) container_of(drv, struct pci_driver, driver)
> > >
> > >   /**
> > > - * DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE - macro used to describe a pci device table
> > > - * @_table: device table name
> > > - *
> > > - * This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array (a device table)
> > > - * in a generic manner.
> > > - */
> > > -#define DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(_table) \
> > > -       const struct pci_device_id _table[]
> > > -
> > > -/**
> > >
> > > In this case, there is no DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE usage
> > > in the kernel. If someone uses DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro,
> > > it will make  build error.
> > >
> > 
> > And that will make the checkpatch warning go away ?
> > That seems to be very unlikely.
> 
> OK, I will ask Joe Perches to remove the following checkpatch
> warning.
> 
>     WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id
> 
> Best regards,
> Jingoo Han
> 



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Jonas Bonn Dec. 2, 2013, 10:44 a.m. UTC | #4
Hi Joe,

On 12/02/2013 06:48 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> (Adding Jonas Bonn to list as he added the macro in the first place...)

Thanks... ;)

Actually, I think I submitted an even uglier macro called 
DECLARE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE... might have been the first kernel patch I 
ever sent?  In any case, it should certainly have been kindly rejected. 
  After it hit mainline Andrew Morton just about choked on his tea and 
renamed it DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE.

>
> On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 13:03 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>> On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:56 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On 12/01/2013 07:50 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>> On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:46 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>>> On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't
>>>>>>>>>>>> use it in more places.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>> not going to take these patches.
>>>>>>>>>>>

Feel free to just remove the macro; it serves no purpose but to confuse. 
  That said, the underlying issue that the macro was supposed to resolve 
(if I recall correctly) was to make sure that all the struct 
pci_device_id instances were marked as const, as per the PCI 
documentation; if there's something checkpatch should be warning for 
it's simply that the struct is const.

/Jonas

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

--- a/include/linux/pci.h
+++ b/include/linux/pci.h
@@ -631,16 +631,6 @@  struct pci_driver {
 #define        to_pci_driver(drv) container_of(drv, struct pci_driver, driver)

 /**
- * DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE - macro used to describe a pci device table
- * @_table: device table name
- *
- * This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array (a device table)
- * in a generic manner.
- */
-#define DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(_table) \
-       const struct pci_device_id _table[]
-
-/**

In this case, there is no DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE usage
in the kernel. If someone uses DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro,