Subject: Re: com rumblings...
To: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
From: Garrett D'Amore <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/16/2006 09:17:54
Jason Thorpe wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2006, at 5:25 AM, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
>> Why don't you make them wrapper functions which prepare struct softc?
>> How about structures like this?
> I think it would be a good idea to get away from creating fake softcs.
> -- thorpej
I'm trying to understand what you mean by this comment; particularly in
the context of this discussion. Specifically, are you saying its a bad
idea to initialize a softc that isn't really a softc (as Tsutsui-san
suggests), or that it is a bad idea to use some pseudo-softc structure
(ala struct com_regs) like I've done?
Personally, I find the idea of initializing a softc structure with a
bunch of stuff in it that won't be used (and maybe isn't initialized)
ugly -- and possibly error prone. (Some assumes they are dealing with a
normal softc and prints sc_dev.dv_xname, for instance. Is that
initialized to a sane value? Who knows?)
I think my approach is still pretty sane.
Garrett D'Amore, Principal Software Engineer
Tadpole Computer / Computing Technologies Division,
General Dynamics C4 Systems
Phone: 951 325-2134 Fax: 951 325-2191