2006-10-19 18:33:01

by David KOENIG

Subject: pci_[g|s]et_drvdata() versus ->driver_data

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Is there any reason for some drivers that I should leave references as
foo->driver_data instead of pci_get_drvdata(foo)?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFN8TLmhCgVPlWJY8RAv4lAJ9VrJg+DlXt+AMvVBBbMSgl/3UqzgCgpynk
cGm7n7hfEdgWZQxZ0qeXhqE=
=0KXz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2006-10-19 22:20:27

by Russell King

Subject: Re: pci_[g|s]et_drvdata() versus ->driver_data

On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 11:32:44AM -0700, David KOENIG wrote:
> Is there any reason for some drivers that I should leave references as
> foo->driver_data instead of pci_get_drvdata(foo)?

When "foo" is not a struct pci_dev ?

--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core