On Thu, 2024-10-31 at 14:45 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15 2024 at 20:51, Philipp Stanner wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * pci_intx - enables/disables PCI INTx for device dev, unmanaged
> > version
>
> mismatch vs. actual function name.
ACK, will fix
>
> > + * @pdev: the PCI device to operate on
> > + * @enable: boolean: whether to enable or disable PCI INTx
> > + *
> > + * Enables/disables PCI INTx for device @pdev
> > + *
> > + * This function behavios identically to pci_intx(), but is never
> > managed with
> > + * devres.
> > + */
> > +void pci_intx_unmanaged(struct pci_dev *pdev, int enable)
>
> This is a misnomer. The function controls the INTX_DISABLE bit of a
> PCI device. Something like this:
>
> void __pci_intx_control()
> {
> }
>
> static inline void pci_intx_enable(d)
> {
> __pci_intx_control(d, true);
> }
>
> .....
>
> makes it entirely clear what this is about.
Well, I would agree if it were about writing a 'real' new function. But
this is actually about creating a _temporary_ function which is added
here and removed again in patch 12 of this same series.
It wouldn't even be needed; the only reason why it exists is to make it
easy for the driver maintainers concerned by patches 2-11 to review the
change and understand what's going on. Hence it is
"pci_intx_unmanaged()" == "Attention, we take automatic management away
from your driver"
pci_intx() is then fully restored after patch 12 and it keeps its old
name.
Grüße,
Philipp
>
> Hmm?
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
