[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZTeqeRRbJgEdbMV3@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 12:28:57 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Miguel Luis <miguel.luis@...cle.com>
Cc: "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"loongarch@...ts.linux.dev" <loongarch@...ts.linux.dev>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev" <kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
"jianyong.wu@....com" <jianyong.wu@....com>,
"justin.he@....com" <justin.he@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Rename acpi_scan_device_not_present() to be about
enumeration
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 10:15:07AM +0000, Miguel Luis wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> > On 20 Oct 2023, at 18:47, Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > From: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
> >
> > acpi_scan_device_not_present() is called when a device in the
> > hierarchy is not available for enumeration. Historically enumeration
> > was only based on whether the device was present.
> >
> > To add support for only enumerating devices that are both present
> > and enabled, this helper should be renamed. It was only ever about
> > enumeration, rename it acpi_scan_device_not_enumerated().
> >
> > No change in behaviour is intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
> > Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
>
> Fixes: 443fc8202272 ("ACPI / hotplug: Rework generic code to handle suprise removals”) ?
I'm not sure a patch that is merely renaming a function should ever
have a Fixes tag, since it's just a naming issue, it doesn't fix a
bug, change functionality or anything like that.
I would suggest that there would need to be good reason why such a
patch should be backported to stable kernels - for example, something
else that does fix a user visible bug requires this change.
Thanks.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists