Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 4/7] serial: Seperate the PCI device ids and parameters

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 10.03.14 at 17:51, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:38:54PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 04:30:44PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > >>> On 10.03.14 at 17:23, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> 
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 09:41:40AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > >> >>> On 07.03.14 at 20:01, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> 
>> > >> >>> wrote:
>> > >> > @@ -96,28 +100,27 @@ struct ns16550_config_mmio {
>> > >> >  
>> > >> >  
>> > >> >  #ifdef HAS_PCI
>> > >> > +enum ns16550_config_param_nr {
>> > >> 
>> > >> Perhaps better e.g. _kind or _idx rather than _nr? But in the end
>> > >> you don't use the enum tag anyway, so you could as well leave out
>> > >> the tag altogether.
>> > > 
>> > > OK, will replace it with #defines.
>> > 
>> > But that wasn't what I meant.
>> 
>> My apologies.
>> 
>> My brain parsed this statement: 'don't use the enum tag.. leave out the tag 
> altogether'
>> as the 'enum' not being useful. But you meant the '_nr'.
> 
> But then of course the moment I changed it to 'ns16550_config_param' I 
> realized
> why I had tacked on _nr to it. We already have the 'struct 
> ns16550_config_param'
> so we get name space collision.
> 
> I will go ahead and make the 'enum' as ns16550_config_param_idx as you 
> suggested.

Still - why not leave off the tag altogether - you don't really need
it to be named, as you never refer to it.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel