Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC Part1 PATCH v3 09/17] resource: Consolidate resource walking code | From | Tom Lendacky <> | Date | Thu, 17 Aug 2017 14:03:30 -0500 |
| |
On 8/17/2017 1:55 PM, Tom Lendacky wrote: > On 7/28/2017 10:23 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:07:49PM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: >>> From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> >>> >>> The walk_iomem_res_desc(), walk_system_ram_res() and >>> walk_system_ram_range() >>> functions each have much of the same code. Create a new function that >>> consolidates the common code from these functions in one place to reduce >>> the amount of duplicated code. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com> >>> --- >>> kernel/resource.c | 53 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------- >>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c >>> index 9b5f044..7b20b3e 100644 >>> --- a/kernel/resource.c >>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c >>> @@ -397,9 +397,30 @@ static int find_next_iomem_res(struct resource >>> *res, unsigned long desc, >>> res->start = p->start; >>> if (res->end > p->end) >>> res->end = p->end; >>> + res->desc = p->desc; >>> return 0; >> >> I must be going blind: where are we using that res->desc? > > I think that was left-over from the initial consolidation work I was > doing. I'll remove it.
I spoke too soon... I use it in a later patch as part of a callback. But instead of putting it here, I'll add it to the patch that actually needs it.
Thanks, Tom
> >> >>> +static int __walk_iomem_res_desc(struct resource *res, unsigned long >>> desc, >>> + bool first_level_children_only, >> >> Btw, that variable name is insanely long. > > I know, but I'm maintaining consistency with the name that was already > present vs. changing it. > >> >> The rest looks ok to me, thanks for the cleanup! > > Thanks, > Tom > >>
| |