On 10/01/2009 12:08 PM, Vasu Dev wrote: > On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 14:59 -0500, micha...@cs.wisc.edu wrote: >> - lport = fcoe_if_create(fcoe,&netdev->dev, 0); >> + lport = fcoe_if_create(fcoe,&netdev->dev.parent, 0); > > No ampersand needed here since dev.parent is already a pointer unlink > previously used netdev->dev. >
Ughh, how did that even work for me. I will resend with that fixed if this is the way we want to go. Thanks. Do we instead want the parent to be the netdev device so it shows up in sysfs like that? I am not sure which is better or right wrt sysfs rules. I just know what we want the scsi layer to end up getting the pci device's device, but we can do that in different ways if you guys want the netdev in the sysfs tree. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@open-fcoe.org http://www.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
