> From: Vitaly Kuznetsov [mailto:vkuzn...@redhat.com] > > diff --git a/drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c b/drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c > > > > +/* hvsock related definitions */ > > +enum hvsock_event { > > + /* The host application is close()-ing the connection */ > > + HVSOCK_RESCIND_CHANNEL, > > +}; > > + > > struct vmbus_channel { > > /* Unique channel id */ > > int id; > > @@ -740,6 +746,13 @@ struct vmbus_channel { > > void (*sc_creation_callback)(struct vmbus_channel *new_sc); > > > > /* > > + * hvsock event callback. > > + * For now only 1 event is defined: HVSOCK_RESCIND_CHANNEL. > > + */ > > + void (*hvsock_event_callback)(struct vmbus_channel *channel, > > + enum hvsock_event event); > > Would it make sense to rename it to something more general, > e.g. sc_rescind_callback and call it for all drivers (even if we don't > need it now) intead of introducing enum hvsock_event? When new events Your suggestion is good: channel->hvsock_event_callback != NULL implies is_hvsock_channel(channel) is true.
> arrive we'll just add new callbacks (or, alternatively, we could unify > it to 'channel_event_callback' and merging with sc_creation_callback() > but I'd say it is uglier). I'm OK to use the idea "when new events arrive we'll just add new callbacks". Let me make a new patch. Thanks, -- Dexuan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
