This is the final cleanup : deletion of pci_driver.name and .owner
happens now.
Signed-off-by: Laurent Riffard <[email protected]>
--
drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 5 -----
include/linux/pci.h | 8 --------
2 files changed, 13 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6-stable/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-stable.orig/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
+++ linux-2.6-stable/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
@@ -339,11 +339,6 @@
int error;
/* initialize common driver fields */
- if (drv->name) {
- /* backward compatibility until all pci_driver are converted to
- * use pci_driver.driver.name instead of pci_driver.name */
- drv->driver.name = drv->name;
- }
drv->driver.bus = &pci_bus_type;
drv->driver.probe = pci_device_probe;
drv->driver.remove = pci_device_remove;
Index: linux-2.6-stable/include/linux/pci.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-stable.orig/include/linux/pci.h
+++ linux-2.6-stable/include/linux/pci.h
@@ -664,14 +664,6 @@
struct module;
struct pci_driver {
struct list_head node;
- /*
- * Please do not use the 2 following fields, they are planned for
- * deletion.
- * Use driver.name instead of .name.
- * The field driver.owner will be set by pci_register_driver.
- */
- char *name;
- struct module *owner;
const struct pci_device_id *id_table; /* must be non-NULL for probe to be called */
int (*probe) (struct pci_dev *dev, const struct pci_device_id *id); /* New device inserted */
void (*remove) (struct pci_dev *dev); /* Device removed (NULL if not a hot-plug capable driver) */
--
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 10:48:05PM +0200, Laurent riffard wrote:
> This is the final cleanup : deletion of pci_driver.name and .owner
> happens now.
what? Did you actually try to build a kernel with this patch applied?
Sorry, but I think we have to wait a long time before this can be
appliedr...
thanks,
greg k-h
Le 26.10.2005 23:11, Greg KH a ?crit :
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 10:48:05PM +0200, Laurent riffard wrote:
>
>>This is the final cleanup : deletion of pci_driver.name and .owner
>>happens now.
>
>
> what? Did you actually try to build a kernel with this patch applied?
No, a bunch of patch #2-like have to be applied first.
This third patch is to be applied after *all* the drivers are
converted to use the pci_driver.driver.{name|owner} fields.
> Sorry, but I think we have to wait a long time before this can be
> appliedr...
Yes, I know. Is it worth to do it ?
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
thanks
--
laurent
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 12:22:27AM +0200, Laurent Riffard wrote:
>
> Le 26.10.2005 23:11, Greg KH a ?crit :
> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 10:48:05PM +0200, Laurent riffard wrote:
> >
> >>This is the final cleanup : deletion of pci_driver.name and .owner
> >>happens now.
> >
> >
> > what? Did you actually try to build a kernel with this patch applied?
>
> No, a bunch of patch #2-like have to be applied first.
>
> This third patch is to be applied after *all* the drivers are
> converted to use the pci_driver.driver.{name|owner} fields.
>
> > Sorry, but I think we have to wait a long time before this can be
> > appliedr...
>
> Yes, I know. Is it worth to do it ?
The .owner stuff, yes. Do that first and then we can revisit the .name
stuff and see if that is worth it or not.
thanks,
greg k-h
Le 27.10.2005 00:26, Greg KH a ?crit :
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 12:22:27AM +0200, Laurent Riffard wrote:
>
>>Le 26.10.2005 23:11, Greg KH a ?crit :
>>
>>>On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 10:48:05PM +0200, Laurent riffard wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>This is the final cleanup : deletion of pci_driver.name and .owner
>>>>happens now.
>>>
>>>
>>>what? Did you actually try to build a kernel with this patch applied?
>>
>>No, a bunch of patch #2-like have to be applied first.
>>
>>This third patch is to be applied after *all* the drivers are
>>converted to use the pci_driver.driver.{name|owner} fields.
>>
>>
>>>Sorry, but I think we have to wait a long time before this can be
>>>appliedr...
>>
>>Yes, I know. Is it worth to do it ?
>
>
> The .owner stuff, yes. Do that first and then we can revisit the .name
> stuff and see if that is worth it or not.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Ok, I'll try to submit tomorrow such a patch.
thanks
--
laurent