[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFw22JD8W2cy3w=5VcU9-ENXSP9utmhGB2NeiDVqwpnUSw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:19:05 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Vishal L Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] resource: Add @flags to region_intersects()
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> Oh sure, I didn't mean you. I was simply questioning that whole
> identify-resource-by-its-name approach. And that came with:
>
> 67cf13ceed89 ("x86: optimize resource lookups for ioremap")
>
> I just think it is silly and that we should be identifying resource
> things in a more robust way.
I could easily imagine just adding a IORESOURCE_RAM flag (or SYSMEM or
whatever). That sounds sane. I agree that comparing the string is
ugly.
> Btw, the ->name thing in struct resource has been there since a *long*
> time
It's pretty much always been there. It is indeed meant for things
like /proc/iomem etc, and as a debug aid when printing conflicts,
yadda yadda. Just showing the numbers is usually useless for figuring
out exactly *what* something conflicts with.
Linus
--
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