From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932097AbXBSLaW (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 06:30:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932089AbXBSLaW (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 06:30:22 -0500 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.170]:52026 "EHLO mgw-ext11.nokia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932097AbXBSLaV convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 06:30:21 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/44 take 2] [UBI] internal common header From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig , Frank Haverkamp , Josh Boyer , Thomas Gleixner , David Woodhouse In-Reply-To: <200702172205.11829.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20070217165424.5845.4390.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20070217165449.5845.18238.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <200702172205.11829.arnd@arndb.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:16:38 +0200 Message-Id: <1171883798.13817.13.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.3 (2.8.3-1.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Feb 2007 11:16:38.0650 (UTC) FILETIME=[6C9C1DA0:01C75417] X-eXpurgate-Category: 1/0 X-eXpurgate-ID: 149371::070219131301-32AA6BB0-39B9A3F7/0-0/0-1 X-Nokia-AV: Clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2007-02-17 at 22:05 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > +/* Maximum number of supported UBI devices */ > > +#define UBI_MAX_INSTANCES 32 > > Does this need to be limited? It is how this is implemented at the moment. Note, this limits number of UBI devices, not ubi _volumes_. > > +/* UBI error messages */ > > +#define ubi_err(fmt, ...) \ > > + printk(UBI_ERR_LEVEL UBI_ERR_PREF " %s " fmt "\n", __FUNCTION__, \ > > + ##__VA_ARGS__) > > You shouldn't need these helpers, just use the regular dev_dbg, dev_info > and related macros. I will look at them and see if they are ok. > > +struct ubi_info { > > + int ubi_num; > > + struct ubi_io_info *io; > > + struct ubi_bgt_info *bgt; > > + struct ubi_wl_info *wl; > > + struct ubi_beb_info *beb; > > + struct ubi_vmt_info *vmt; > > + struct ubi_ivol_info *ivol; > > + struct ubi_vtbl_info *vtbl; > > + struct ubi_acc_info *acc; > > + struct ubi_upd_info *upd; > > + struct ubi_eba_info *eba; > > + struct ubi_uif_info *uif; > > +}; > > I don't know what went wrong here, but this does not at all > look ok. The members in here probably should all be part > of the ubi_info structure itself. Will be fixed, thanks. -- Best regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)