On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> will use it with pci_stop_and_remove_bus later.
>>
>> also remove __pci_remove_behind_bridge and pci_stop_behind_bridge.
>>
>> they are same except one take bridge and one take bus.
>>
>> and we already have pci_stop_bus_devices()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/pci/remove.c | 28 +++++++++++-----------------
>> 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/remove.c b/drivers/pci/remove.c
>> index 243d59b..62c348c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/remove.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/remove.c
>> @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ void pci_remove_bus(struct pci_bus *pci_bus)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_remove_bus);
>>
>> -static void __pci_remove_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev);
>> +static void __pci_remove_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus);
>> /**
>> * pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device - remove a PCI device and any children
>> * @dev: the device to remove
>> @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ void __pci_remove_bus_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> if (dev->subordinate) {
>> struct pci_bus *b = dev->subordinate;
>>
>> - __pci_remove_behind_bridge(dev);
>> + __pci_remove_bus_devices(b);
>> pci_remove_bus(b);
>> dev->subordinate = NULL;
>> }
>> @@ -111,22 +111,12 @@ void pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> __pci_remove_bus_device(dev);
>> }
>>
>> -static void __pci_remove_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> +static void __pci_remove_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> {
>> struct list_head *l, *n;
>>
>> - if (dev->subordinate)
>> - list_for_each_safe(l, n, &dev->subordinate->devices)
>> - __pci_remove_bus_device(pci_dev_b(l));
>> -}
>> -
>> -static void pci_stop_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> -{
>> - struct list_head *l, *n;
>> -
>> - if (dev->subordinate)
>> - list_for_each_safe(l, n, &dev->subordinate->devices)
>> - pci_stop_bus_device(pci_dev_b(l));
>> + list_for_each_safe(l, n, &bus->devices)
>> + __pci_remove_bus_device(pci_dev_b(l));
>
> Use list_for_each_entry_safe() so you don't need pci_dev_b().
just want to keep the patch to simple, and looks like just name renaming.
also use list_for_each_safe instead of list_for_each_entry_safe
could have less conversion.
>
>> }
>>
>> static void pci_stop_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> @@ -158,8 +148,12 @@ static void pci_stop_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> */
>> void pci_stop_and_remove_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> {
>> - pci_stop_behind_bridge(dev);
>> - __pci_remove_behind_bridge(dev);
>> + struct pci_bus *bus = dev->subordinate;
>> +
>> + if (bus) {
>
> Don't check "bus" here. If the caller screws up and passes a
> non-bridge pointer, I want to learn about it rather than ignore it.
old code have that
if (dev->subordinate)
checking.
Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
