From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: paul.gortmaker@windriver.com (Paul Gortmaker) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 09:53:08 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: versatile: fix build failure in pci.c In-Reply-To: <20120404090754.GR24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1333410505-17257-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <201204030819.48798.arnd@arndb.de> <4F7AFF61.3070803@windriver.com> <20120404090754.GR24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <4F7C5244.4040700@windriver.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 12-04-04 05:07 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:47:13AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >> As a side note, the fact that struct pci_sys_data is ARM specific >> does make one think it would be nice if the name somehow did >> reflect that... wonder if it is worth changing. Anyway, that is >> a separate topic. > > And what's wrong with the existing name when it's limited to only > ARM specific files? Just in the context of Arnd's original comment, he thought I screwed up by feeding an ARM specific struct into generic PCI code, because I wasn't aware it was ARM specific. That wasn't the case, but he's right that something like that could happen A minor nit, sure, but if it was something like pci_arm_data, the name itself would convey it was arm specific, even in reduced context scenarios (like grep output etc). P.