On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 03:52:25PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>On 02/17/2016 02:43 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
>>Each PHB has one instance of "struct pci_controller_ops", which
>>includes various callbacks called by PCI subsystem. In the definition
>>of this struct, some callbacks have explicit names for its arguments,
>>but the left don't have.
>>
>>This adds all explicit names of the arguments to the callbacks in
>>"struct pci_controller_ops" so that the code looks consistent.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gws...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>Reviewed-by: Daniel Axtens <d...@axtens.net>
>
>With tiny nit below,
>
>Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru>
>
>
>
>>---
>>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/pci-bridge.h | 13 +++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>>diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pci-bridge.h 
>>b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pci-bridge.h
>>index b688d04..4dd6ef4 100644
>>--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pci-bridge.h
>>+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pci-bridge.h
>>@@ -21,18 +21,19 @@ struct pci_controller_ops {
>>      void            (*dma_dev_setup)(struct pci_dev *dev);
>>      void            (*dma_bus_setup)(struct pci_bus *bus);
>>
>>-     int             (*probe_mode)(struct pci_bus *);
>>+     int             (*probe_mode)(struct pci_bus *bus);
>>
>>      /* Called when pci_enable_device() is called. Returns true to
>>       * allow assignment/enabling of the device. */
>>-     bool            (*enable_device_hook)(struct pci_dev *);
>>+     bool            (*enable_device_hook)(struct pci_dev *dev);
>
>
>"pdev" is slightly better as it is of the "pci_dev" type (4130 occurrences of
>"pci_dev *pdev" and just 2833 of "pci_dev *dev" in the current kernel), "dev"
>is for "struct device".
>

Thanks for your review. I don't know if "dev" is for "struct device" only.
Usually, "dev" and "pdev" are interchangeably used for "struct pci_dev".
Especially the code written in old days uses "dev" for "struct pci_dev"
heavily.

Yes, I agree "pdev" is better than "dev" in this case and I'm going to
fix this up in next revision.

>>
>>-     void            (*disable_device)(struct pci_dev *);
>>+     void            (*disable_device)(struct pci_dev *dev);
>>
>>-     void            (*release_device)(struct pci_dev *);
>>+     void            (*release_device)(struct pci_dev *dev);
>>
>>      /* Called during PCI resource reassignment */
>>-     resource_size_t (*window_alignment)(struct pci_bus *, unsigned long 
>>type);
>>+     resource_size_t (*window_alignment)(struct pci_bus *bus,
>>+                                         unsigned long type);
>>      void            (*setup_bridge)(struct pci_bus *bus,
>>                                      unsigned long type);
>>      void            (*reset_secondary_bus)(struct pci_dev *dev);
>>@@ -46,7 +47,7 @@ struct pci_controller_ops {
>>      int             (*dma_set_mask)(struct pci_dev *dev, u64 dma_mask);
>>      u64             (*dma_get_required_mask)(struct pci_dev *dev);
>>
>>-     void            (*shutdown)(struct pci_controller *);
>>+     void            (*shutdown)(struct pci_controller *hose);
>>  };
>>
>>  /*
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Alexey
>

_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to