On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Friday, January 04, 2013 04:03:01 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h
>>> >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h
>>> >> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>>> >> struct pci_sysdata {
>>> >> int domain; /* PCI domain */
>>> >> int node; /* NUMA node */
>>> >> + void *acpi_handle;
>>> >> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>>> >> void *iommu; /* IOMMU private data */
>>> >> #endif
>>> >>
>>>
>>> acpi_handle is not good name and it is confusing.
>>
>> Well, what would be a better name in your opinion?
>>
>> I was going to put that into a #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI / #endif, so what about
>> calling it acpi_data?
>
> yes, with #ifdef, you can use acpi_handle type directly.
>
> it is acpi handle for pci_root.
>
> so would call int pci_root_acpi_handle ?
I just copied the name from the corresponding ia64 code. I don't care
if you want to change it, but I think there is *some* value in keeping
the x86 and ia64 code as similar as possible because it would be nice
to converge it some day.
Bjorn
--
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
