> > I'm not sure if it's a good idea to define two separate callbacks. It
> > means adding two pointers instead of one (for every instance of the
> > structure, not only those implementing them), doing two calls, running
> > the same checks twice, locking twice, checking the result twice.
> >
> > Also, passing a structure pointer would mean less code changed if we
> > decide to add more related state values later.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > If you don't agree, I have no objections so
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Michal Kubecek <mkube...@suse.cz>
>
> I have no strong opinion on it. Should I rework it?
It is an internal API, so we can change it any time we want.
I did wonder if MAX should just be a static value. It seems odd it
would change at run time. But we can re-evaulate this once we got some
more users.
Andrew
