Re: [PATCH v13 7/9] ACPI: Translate the I/O range of non-MMIO devices before scanning

[John Garry <john.garry-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 16/02/2018 14:42, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:07 PM, John Garry <john.garry-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> On 14/02/2018 16:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>> +       list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node)
>>>>>>>>> +               resources[count++] = *rentry->res;
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It has similarities with acpi_create_platform_device().
>>>>>>> I guess we can utilize existing code.
>>>>
>>>>> For sure, this particular segment is effectively same as part of
>>>>> acpi_create_platform_device():
>>>
>>> Not the same, acpi_create_platform_device() does a bit more than
>>> copying the resources. If it indeed makes no hurt...
>>>
>>>>>         list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node)
>>>>>             acpi_platform_fill_resource(adev, rentry->res,
>>>>>                             &resources[count++]);
>>>>> So is your idea to refactor this common segment into a helper function?
>>>
>>> ...I would go with helper.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> Since the plan now is that this code is no longer going to be added to
>> drivers/acpi, but instead pushed to the LLDD, I am pondering whether we
>> should still factor out of this common code. Opinion?
>
> I would still go with a common helper. Though, as first step, we can
> make it lazy, i.e. put a comment in your code, like a todo notice (w/o
> TODO word :-) ) to consider a common helper.

Fine, I was also thinking that I don't want to do this now as it could 
make merging the patchset more complex. For now, the ACPI change I plan 
creates no dependencies.

Cheers,
John

>


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html