linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v5 4/6] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core

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: <20150610164821.GA18832@red-moon>
Date:	Wed, 10 Jun 2015 17:48:22 +0100
From:	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To:	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
	"hanjun.guo@...aro.org" <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
	Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"x86 @ kernel . org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch v5 4/6] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code
 into ACPI core

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 05:58:15PM +0100, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2015/6/10 0:12, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:

[...]

> >> +struct pci_bus *acpi_pci_root_create(struct acpi_pci_root *root,
> >> +				     struct acpi_pci_root_ops *ops,
> >> +				     struct acpi_pci_root_info *info,
> >> +				     void *sysdata, int segment, int node)
> > 
> > I do not think you need to pass segment and node, they clutter the
> > function signature when you can retrieve them from root, I would
> > make them local variables and use root->segment and acpi_get_node
> > in the function body to retrieve them.
> On x86, node and segment may be overridden under certain conditions.
> For example, segment will always be 0 if 'pci_ignore_seg' is set.

Ok, so the question would be then why do you not override the value
in root->segment then (actually, is it *correct* to leave the segment
value in root-> unchanged even if it is overriden) ?

Anyway, node is just used for a printk, why do not you add segment and
node to acpi_pci_root_info ? Just cosmetic stuff, trying to help you
simplify the code, it is not easy to parse.

Thanks,
Lorenzo
--
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/