[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/25] Replace DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro use
- To: Benoit Taine <benoit.taine@xxxxxxx>
- From: "John W. Linville" <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:22:13 -0400
- Cc: linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fbdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ath5k-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-acenic@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ath10k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-hippi@xxxxxxxxxx, industrypack-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ath9k-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wil6210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-pcmcia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-can@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, e1000-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 16:37:07 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:26:47PM +0200, Benoit Taine wrote:
> We should prefer `const struct pci_device_id` over
> `DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE` to meet kernel coding style guidelines.
> This issue was reported by checkpatch.
Honestly, I prefer the macro -- it stands-out more. Maybe the style
guidelines and/or checkpatch should change instead?
John
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx might be all we have. Be ready.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
