[patch] use C99 initialisers for PCI_VDEVICE()

[Ulrich Eckhardt <doomster@knuut.de>]

(Note: CC me please, I'm not subscribed.)

Not much to say about the patch (it's against 2.6.20.6), it just converts a 
macro to generate C99-style initialisers.

--- include/linux/pci.h   (revision 17)
+++ include/linux/pci.h   (working copy)
@@ -407,9 +407,10 @@
  * private data.
  */
 
-#define PCI_VDEVICE(vendor, device)            \
-       PCI_VENDOR_ID_##vendor, (device),       \
-       PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0
+#define PCI_VDEVICE(vend, dev)         \
+       .vendor=PCI_VENDOR_ID_##vend, .device=(dev),    \
+       .subvendor=PCI_ANY_ID, .subdevice=PCI_ANY_ID,   \
+       .class=0, .class_mask=0


However, I still have two issues with this:
1. It explicitly allows in the comments for PCI_VDEVICE to have non-C99 fields 
follow for the driver_data field. IMHO this is wrong per se (just as 
old-style initialisers are), so the comment should perhaps be removed.
2. What happens to fields not initialised with this? I believe that these are 
initialised with zero, just like missing fields in old initialisers are, 
right? In that case, I would remove the initialisers for class and 
class_mask, so that people can at least optionally use them. However, this 
goes hand in hand with issue #1 because it would definitely break code that 
lets old-style initialisers follow.

As far as issue #2 is concerned, I did some checking (grep -r PCI_VDEVICE) and 
the only places where this is at all used is in the ATA code (drivers/ata)! 
Hmmm, no problem, that is grunt work but easily patched, too. If consensus 
exists that the class/class_mask fields should be removed, I hereby volunteer 
to submit a patch for that and the ATA code.

Uli
-
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/