[PATCH/RFC] PCI Error Recovery

Linas Vepstas linas at austin.ibm.com
Tue Mar 15 05:14:20 EST 2005

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 09:33:03PM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto was heard to remark:
> Linas Vepstas wrote:
> >+enum pci_device_io_state {
> ... but I think it's of value to have the list of states.
> (Even it seems that the list what originally you want isn't "state list"
>  but "event list".)

Sorry, you are right, I confused the concept of "state transition" with 
the concept of "state", I will try to clarify the difference in the next

> would be realized by:
> I think the latter style is more generic.

Hmm, are you suggesting that there **shouldn't** be a callback 
function in struct pci_driver, and that instead, all state changes
should be delivered as events? (i.e. by means of the notifier_chain
mechanism?) Hmm ... thats possible, I'd have to rearrange the code a

Is there a long-term philosphy for the Linux kernel on a question like
this?  That is, when should changes add callbacks to structures, 
as opposed to notifier-chain based events?  The callback is a bit
simpler, and maybe a tiny bit faster, but its less flexible in the 
long run (e.g. anyone can listen for the events, but only device 
drivers can get callbacks). Comments, please?


More information about the Linuxppc64-dev mailing list