Quoting "Pavel Roskin" <pro...@gnu.org>:
> On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 13:09 +0300, Jussi Kivilinna wrote:
>> +static void __ath5k_disable_aspm(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 state);
>> +static void ath5k_disable_aspm(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 state);
>
> Forward declarations should not be needed unless the functions are
> called before their implementations, which is not the case here.
Ok.
>
>> @@ -424,6 +427,47 @@ module_exit(exit_ath5k_pci);
>> * PCI Initialization *
>> \********************/
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCIEASPM
>> +static void __ath5k_disable_aspm(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 state)
>> +{
>> + pci_disable_link_state(pdev, state);
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +static void __ath5k_disable_aspm(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 state)
>> +{
>
> It looks like a replacement for pci_disable_link_state() if
> CONFIG_PCIEASPM is disabled. I guess it should be in the PCI code, not
> in ath5k. At least the PCI developers should have a look at the
> replacement code.
I used code from e1000e which does this same way, which now suddenly
reminds me of that ath5k is dual lisenced, right? Can I even reuse
code from GPL driver in ath5k?
-Jussi
_______________________________________________
ath5k-devel mailing list
ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org
https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
