[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170302192406.GA8519@wtj.duckdns.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 14:24:06 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Pratyush Anand <pratyush.anand@...il.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@...escale.com>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@....com>,
Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>,
Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@...inx.com>,
Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
Wenrui Li <wenrui.li@...k-chips.com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>,
Minghuan Lian <minghuan.Lian@...escale.com>,
Jon Mason <jonmason@...adcom.com>,
Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@...sol.com>,
Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>,
Roy Zang <tie-fei.zang@...escale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/20] PCI: implement Devres interface to map PCI config
space
Hello,
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 02:50:00PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > I thought about that and did not do it because here we are remapping
> > resources that are _not_ PCI bus resources (ie it is not PCI BARs we
> > are remapping), keeping the devm_* prefix would be more consistent
> > to the typical device drivers remapping functions pattern (ie a
> > typical PCI host controller driver would mix devm_ and pcim_ calls
> > which is a bit hard to parse), that was my rationale.
> >
> > I am not too fussed about that either way, I am happy to update it to
> > pcim_* though, it is Bjorn/Arnd's decision.
>
> I would vote for pcim_*() variant.
Me too, for brevity.
> >> 2. If you may notice there is no separate pcim_*map*() stuff, they are
> >> dynamically adapting to the case.
> >
> > I do not understand what you mean here I would ask you to elaborate
> > a bit more please so that I can do something about it.
>
> Oh, sorry, there are two examples currently, i.e.
> pci_enable_msi()/pci_enable_msix() and pci_request_region*() which has
> no "m" in the name, but are managed on release by pcim_release().
> Some developers consider this as a bad idea, but so far no patch has
> been sent to introduce pcim_*() variants of those.
>
> So, regarding to your stuff, I would stick with "pcim" prefix.
Sounds good to me.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists