On 16/02/2018 14:42, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:07 PM, John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 14/02/2018 16:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
+ list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node)
+ resources[count++] = *rentry->res;
It has similarities with acpi_create_platform_device().
I guess we can utilize existing code.
For sure, this particular segment is effectively same as part of
acpi_create_platform_device():
Not the same, acpi_create_platform_device() does a bit more than
copying the resources. If it indeed makes no hurt...
list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node)
acpi_platform_fill_resource(adev, rentry->res,
&resources[count++]);
So is your idea to refactor this common segment into a helper function?
...I would go with helper.
Hi Andy,
Since the plan now is that this code is no longer going to be added to
drivers/acpi, but instead pushed to the LLDD, I am pondering whether we
should still factor out of this common code. Opinion?
I would still go with a common helper. Though, as first step, we can
make it lazy, i.e. put a comment in your code, like a todo notice (w/o
TODO word :-) ) to consider a common helper.
Fine, I was also thinking that I don't want to do this now as it could
make merging the patchset more complex. For now, the ACPI change I plan
creates no dependencies.
Cheers,
John
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
