On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 01:26:16AM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 03:52:08PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 09:03:45PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > > --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c > > > @@ -1206,6 +1206,37 @@ void set_pcie_hotplug_bridge(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > > pdev->is_hotplug_bridge = 1; > > > } > > > > > > +static void set_pcie_vendor_specific(struct pci_dev *dev) > > > > This is very specific to Thunderbolt, so let's name it something that > > conveys that information. The fact that we use a vendor-specific > > capability to figure it out isn't really relevant in the caller. > > I thought that we may have the necessity in the future to parse other > VSECs on device probe, so I gave the function this generic name. > > Think about it, every VSEC that needs to be parsed needs the while loop > below. It's more efficient to have only a single while loop that handles > *all* VSECs at once. > > If someone needs to parse another VSEC, they just add it to this function. > So IMO the way I've solved it is preferable to just adding a Thunderbolt- > specific function. > > Are you sure you want this renamed? (y/n) Bjorn, I'm taking the liberty to send a gentle ping already after a week: Could you give me a quick yes or no for the above question so that I get a chance to submit a rectified version of this patch before the merge window opens? Thanks! Lukas
