On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 1:20 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:23 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:33 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > @@ -909,8 +881,7 @@ struct pci_bus *acpi_pci_root_create(struct acpi_pci_root *root, > > > int ret, busnum = root->secondary.start; > > > struct acpi_device *device = root->device; > > > int node = acpi_get_node(device->handle); > > > - struct pci_bus *bus; > > > - struct pci_host_bridge *host_bridge; > > > + struct pci_host_bridge *bridge; > > > > Why "bridge" and not "host" or even something to stand for "root complex"? > > > > Or maybe it can still be "host_bridge"? > > I did this for consistency with the naming in drivers/pci/probe.c, > which always declares the local variable as 'struct pci_host_bridge *bridge'. > It's easy to change here if you feel strongly about it (I don't). I would leave host_bridge here. It would make the patch smaller too I think.
