Hi,
Thanks for you noticed my change.
On 2023/7/20 03:32, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
@@ -1509,13 +1543,24 @@ static int pci_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long action,
* cases of hotplugable vga cards.
*/
- if (action == BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE)
+ switch (action) {
+ case BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE:
notify = vga_arbiter_add_pci_device(pdev);
- else if (action == BUS_NOTIFY_DEL_DEVICE)
+ if (notify)
+ vga_arbiter_notify_clients();
+ break;
+ case BUS_NOTIFY_DEL_DEVICE:
notify = vga_arbiter_del_pci_device(pdev);
+ if (notify)
+ vga_arbiter_notify_clients();
+ break;
+ case BUS_NOTIFY_BOUND_DRIVER:
+ vga_arbiter_do_arbitration(pdev);
+ break;
+ default:
+ break;
+ }
Changing from if/else to switch makes the patch bigger than necessary
for no real benefit and obscures what is really changing.
Actually, the logic become more clear after this patch applied.
```
switch (action) {
case BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE:
notify = vga_arbiter_add_pci_device(pdev);
if (notify)
vga_arbiter_notify_clients();
break;
case BUS_NOTIFY_DEL_DEVICE:
notify = vga_arbiter_del_pci_device(pdev);
if (notify)
vga_arbiter_notify_clients();
break;
case BUS_NOTIFY_BOUND_DRIVER:
vga_arbiter_do_arbitration(pdev);
break;
default:
break;
}
```
Because we only need call vga_arbiter_notify_clients() when action ==
BUS_NOTIFY_ADD_DEVICE or action == BUS_NOTIFY_DEL_DEVICE,
But *NOT* when the action equals to BUS_NOTIFY_BOUND_DRIVER.