Re: [PATCH 01/10] IOCHK interface for I/O error handling/detecting

[Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Hi Greg,

Thank you for giving me many useful advices!

Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 09:48:15PM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
>
> > +void iochk_init(void) { ; }
> > +
> > +void iochk_clear(iocookie *cookie, struct pci_dev *dev)
> > +{
> > +	/* no-ops */
> > +}
>
> A bit of a coding style difference between the two functions, yet they
> do the same thing :)

I intended to emphasize the pair. I'll unify them if not needed.

> > +int iochk_read(iocookie *cookie)
> > +{
> > +	/* no-ops */
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
>
> Why not just return the cookie?  Can this ever fail?

In this time, no one initializes the cookie, so I just ignored it.

> Shouldn't these go into a .h file and be made "static inline" so they
> just compile away to nothing?

I'm not used to inlining...
In case of generic definition above, absolutely it should be inlined.
OK, I'll try.

> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(iochk_clear);
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(iochk_read);
>
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() perhaps?

Yea.

> > +#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_IOMAP_CHECK
> > +typedef unsigned long iocookie;
> > +#endif
>
> Why typedef this if it isn't specified?

Because I stuck to have short name alias, and wanted to hide even
whether it is struct or not.

Thanks,
H.Seto

-
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/