Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 Sep 2012 20:18:34 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH part2 4/6] x86, PCI: Separate rom resource claim out | From | Yinghai Lu <> |
| |
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> wrote: >> So could use it with hot-added root bus. >> >> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> >> --- >> arch/x86/pci/i386.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- >> 1 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/i386.c b/arch/x86/pci/i386.c >> index 84696ed..4fdf0b2 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/pci/i386.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/i386.c >> @@ -298,27 +298,51 @@ static void __init pcibios_allocate_resources(struct pci_bus *bus, int pass) >> } >> } >> >> +static void __init __pcibios_allocate_rom_resources(struct pci_bus *bus) >> +{ >> + struct pci_dev *dev; >> + struct pci_bus *child; >> + >> + list_for_each_entry(dev, &bus->devices, bus_list) { >> + pcibios_allocate_dev_rom_resource(dev); >> + >> + child = dev->subordinate; >> + if (child) >> + __pcibios_allocate_rom_resources(child); > > I really dislike the "__" prefix on the function names. It seems > pointless to add another function and the "__" when all you need is a > test of PCI_ASSIGN_ROMS. Also, it makes the structure of > __pcibios_allocate_rom_resources() different from > pcibios_allocate_resources() when they should be exactly the same. > > What if you made pcibios_assign_resources() look like this: > > if (!!(pci_probe & PCI_ASSIGN_ROMS)) { > list_for_each_entry(bus, &pci_root_buses, node) > pcibios_allocate_rom_resources(bus); > } > > Then I don't think you'd need the extra function.
ok, will just move pci_probe checking back to pcibios_allocate_rom_resources directly.
Yinghai
| |