We should prefer `struct pci_device_id` over `DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE` to meet
kernel coding style guidelines. This issue was reported by checkpatch.
Signed-off-by: Benoit Taine <benoit.ta...@lip6.fr>
---
Tested by compilation without errors.
drivers/ipack/carriers/tpci200.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/ipack/carriers/tpci200.c b/drivers/ipack/carriers/tpci200.c
index c276fde..de5e321 100644
--- a/drivers/ipack/carriers/tpci200.c
+++ b/drivers/ipack/carriers/tpci200.c
@@ -618,7 +618,7 @@ static void tpci200_pci_remove(struct pci_dev *dev)
__tpci200_pci_remove(tpci200);
}
-static DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(tpci200_idtable) = {
+static const struct pci_device_id tpci200_idtable[] = {
{ TPCI200_VENDOR_ID, TPCI200_DEVICE_ID, TPCI200_SUBVENDOR_ID,
TPCI200_SUBDEVICE_ID },
{ 0, },
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
