On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 05:23:37PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> > > 'data' here is private to the caller. So, I do not think we need
> > > to define the bits. Shall I change the name to 'driver_data' to
> > > make it more explicit?
> >
> > You changed it to 'data'. It was a u32-used-as-boolean
> > is_critical_error before.
> >
> > So you can just as well make it into flags and people can extend
> > those flags if needed. A flag bit should be enough in most cases
> > anyway. If they really need driver_data, then they can add a void *
> > member.
>
> Hmm.. In patch 2, intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists() uses this
> field for PSS and PCC, which are enum values. I think we should allow
> drivers to set any values here. I agree that it may need to be void *
> if we also allow drivers to set a pointer here.
Let's see what Rafael prefers.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
