[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4831F8BC.3080405@keyaccess.nl>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 00:01:32 +0200
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
CC: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Adam Belay <ambx1@....rr.com>,
Adam M Belay <abelay@....edu>,
Li Shaohua <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
Matthieu Castet <castet.matthieu@...e.fr>,
Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/8] PNP: remove pnp_resource.index
On 06-05-08 00:36, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> We used pnp_resource.index to keep track of which ISAPNP configuration
> register a resource should be written to. We needed this only to
> handle the case where a register is disabled but a subsequent register
> in the same set is enabled.
>
> Rather than explicitly maintaining the pnp_resource.index, this patch
> adds a resource every time we read an ISAPNP configuration register
> and marks the resource as IORESOURCE_DISABLED when appropriate. This
> makes the position in the pnp_resource_table always correspond to the
> config register index.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
> - pnp_res = pnp_add_io_resource(dev, start, end,
> - 0);
> - if (pnp_res)
> - pnp_res->index = nport++;
> + pnp_add_io_resource(dev, start, end, 0);
In the tree after your v2 series, pnp_add_foo_resource() are called as
void functions yet still return a struct pnp_resource *. You might have
other plans but if not, I guess they can _be_ void functions?
Otherwise:
Acked-by: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists