linux-kernel - Re: [Alternative 2][PATCH] ACPI / PCI: Set root bridge ACPI handle in advance

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]

Message-ID: <7114758.9n3BYUUJrs@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Sat, 05 Jan 2013 01:54:34 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, Jiang Liu <liuj97@...il.com>,
	Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [Alternative 2][PATCH] ACPI / PCI: Set root bridge ACPI handle in advance

On Friday, January 04, 2013 05:36:55 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> 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@...k.pl> 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.

Well, the corresponding data structure for ia64 is called struct pci_controller,
so it is quite obvious what acpi_handle in there means. :-)

Since the data structure for x86 is called struct pci_sysdata and the data
type for the field in question may be acpi_handle, perhaps we can call that
field simply "root_handle"?

Alternatively, in analogy with the iommu we could use void * as its data
type and call it simply "acpi".

That said I'm fine with using just "void *acpi_handle" as you did, but I would
do the #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI / #endif around it anyway.

I wonder what Peter thinks?

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/