linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] PNP cleanups - Unify the pnp macros to access resources in the pnp resource table

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:17:03 +0100
From:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
To:	trenn@...e.de
CC:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
	"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	"yakui.zhao" <yakui.zhao@...el.com>,
	akpm <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PNP cleanups - Unify the pnp macros to access	resources
 in the pnp resource table

On 20-11-07 10:51, Thomas Renninger wrote:

> Unify the pnp macros to access resources in the pnp resource table
> 
> port, mem, dma and irq resource macros are now all used in the same
> way. This is the basis (or makes it at least easier) for changing how
> the resources are allocated for memory optimizations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>

Acked-by: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>

as identity transformation again.

Andrew Morton wrote:

> Normally when I get a big tree-wide patch like this I'll just drop the
> hunks which get rejects so that the patch doesn't screw up other people's
> trees if I merge first.
> 
> 
>> > 
>> > Index: linux-2.6.24-rc2/include/linux/pnp.h
>> > ===================================================================
>> > --- linux-2.6.24-rc2.orig/include/linux/pnp.h
>> > +++ linux-2.6.24-rc2/include/linux/pnp.h
>> > @@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ struct pnp_dev;
>> >  	 (pnp_mem_end((dev),(bar)) -		\
>> >  	  pnp_mem_start((dev),(bar)) + 1))
>> >  
>> > -#define pnp_irq(dev,bar)	 ((dev)->res.irq_resource[(bar)].start)
>> >  #define pnp_irq_start(dev,bar)	 ((dev)->res.irq_resource[(bar)].start)
>> >  #define pnp_irq_end(dev,bar)	 ((dev)->res.irq_resource[(bar)].end)
>> >  #define pnp_irq_flags(dev,bar)	 ((dev)->res.irq_resource[(bar)].flags)
>> > @@ -63,7 +62,6 @@ struct pnp_dev;
>> >  	((pnp_irq_flags((dev),(bar)) & (IORESOURCE_IRQ | IORESOURCE_UNSET)) \
>> >  		== IORESOURCE_IRQ)
>> >  
>> > -#define pnp_dma(dev,bar)	 ((dev)->res.dma_resource[(bar)].start)
> 
> But if I do that, we'll get build breakage.
> 
> And we'll break any files which you missed in the conversion, or which
> people currently have queued in the subsystem trees, or which people are
> maintaining out-of-tree.
> 
> Hence I'd suggest that we retain the above as back-compatibility wrappers
> for a while.

And Shaohua Li wrote:

> patches are great. I have a minor comment. Keep pnp_irq and pnp_dma and
> define them as pnp_irq_start and pnp_dma_start. pnp_irq_start and
> pnp_dma_start is a little confusing from a pnp driver point of view.

Rene.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/