Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 3:36 PM Daniel Scally <djrscally@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 22/02/2021 13:34, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 3:12 PM Daniel Scally <djrscally@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> The acpi_walk_dep_device_list() is not as generalisable as its name
> >> implies, serving only to decrement the dependency count for each
> >> dependent device of the input. Extend the function to instead accept
> >> a callback which can be applied to all the dependencies in acpi_dep_list.
> >> Replace all existing calls to the function with calls to a wrapper, passing
> >> a callback that applies the same dependency reduction.
> > The code looks okay to me, if it was the initial idea, feel free to add
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Thank you!
>
>
> >> + */
> >> +void acpi_dev_flag_dependency_met(acpi_handle handle)
> >> +{
> > Since it's acpi_dev_* namespace, perhaps it should take struct acpi_device here?
>
>
> I can do this, but I avoided it because in most of the uses in the
> kernel currently there's no struct acpi_device, they're just passing
> ACPI_HANDLE(dev) instead, so I'd need to get the adev with
> ACPI_COMPANION() in each place. It didn't seem worth it...but happy to
> do it if you'd prefer it that way?

I see, let Rafael decide then. I'm not pushing here.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko



[Index of Archives]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux