On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 10:08:39AM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 23/3/23 18:36, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > Replace open-coded implementations of pci_resource_n() in pci.h. ... > > #define pci_resource_n(dev, bar) (&(dev)->resource[(bar)]) > > -#define pci_resource_start(dev, bar) ((dev)->resource[(bar)].start) > > -#define pci_resource_end(dev, bar) ((dev)->resource[(bar)].end) > > -#define pci_resource_flags(dev, bar) ((dev)->resource[(bar)].flags) > > -#define pci_resource_len(dev,bar) \ > > - ((pci_resource_end((dev), (bar)) == 0) ? 0 : \ > > - \ > > - (pci_resource_end((dev), (bar)) - \ > > - pci_resource_start((dev), (bar)) + 1)) > > +#define pci_resource_start(dev, bar) (pci_resource_n(dev, bar)->start) > > +#define pci_resource_end(dev, bar) (pci_resource_n(dev, bar)->end) > > +#define pci_resource_flags(dev, bar) (pci_resource_n(dev, bar)->flags) > > +#define pci_resource_len(dev,bar) \ > > + (pci_resource_end((dev), (bar)) ? \ > > + resource_size(pci_resource_n((dev), (bar))) : 0) > > Seems (to me) more logical to have this patch as "PCI: Introduce > pci_resource_n()" ordered before your patch #2 "PCI: Introduce > pci_dev_for_each_resource()". Either way works for me. Bjorn, what do you like? > Here as #6 or as #2: > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@xxxxxxxxxx> Thank you! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
