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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 17:54:06 +0200 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net> To: Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>, Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>, Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>, Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>, Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] ACPI: Drop parent field from struct acpi_device On Saturday, August 27, 2022 3:19:33 PM CEST Hanjun Guo wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > On 2022/8/25 0:59, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Index: linux-pm/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h > > +++ linux-pm/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h > > @@ -365,7 +365,6 @@ struct acpi_device { > > int device_type; > > acpi_handle handle; /* no handle for fixed hardware */ > > struct fwnode_handle fwnode; > > - struct acpi_device *parent; > > struct list_head wakeup_list; > > struct list_head del_list; > > struct acpi_device_status status; > > @@ -458,6 +457,14 @@ static inline void *acpi_driver_data(str > > #define to_acpi_device(d) container_of(d, struct acpi_device, dev) > > #define to_acpi_driver(d) container_of(d, struct acpi_driver, drv) > > > > +static inline struct acpi_device *acpi_dev_parent(struct acpi_device *adev) > > +{ > > + if (adev->dev.parent) > > + return to_acpi_device(adev->dev.parent); > > + > > + return NULL; > > +} > > + > > static inline void acpi_set_device_status(struct acpi_device *adev, u32 sta) > > { > > *((u32 *)&adev->status) = sta; > > @@ -478,6 +485,7 @@ void acpi_initialize_hp_context(struct a > > /* acpi_device.dev.bus == &acpi_bus_type */ > > extern struct bus_type acpi_bus_type; > > > > +struct acpi_device *acpi_dev_parent(struct acpi_device *adev); > > We have a static inline function above, is it duplicated here? > Or did I miss some use cases? No, you didn't, it is redundant. I've just sent a fix for this. Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists