From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 2002:a19:6d5:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 204csp4959907lfg; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:39:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzg3DhLjpAfLMrbaaxse1jTAt8zRnmj3zgh30Un/U+JWdolVJd3Zf5t6cwkXh5Xcc2KOyjf X-Received: by 2002:a92:ca89:: with SMTP id t9mr394911ilo.18.1616539187475; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:39:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1616539187; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=IzrNURvF9KmaPX0W1eeUo1RgRKBd5mHO7CvC6PGTimiZv4WsZxBA+XJtx4Xe8cnhfj lFN5LyaWyrAk3df5VFLPo3cop5DnuwXimtYALuLvhRmzZ42Vs7uAyzAwJT45KoAMalFN sq/UiPBR8GKBvM07Y7fuTbYIry9/ft/mcvdscRXp1hZh5gwjopO2PDY727siU8E4jexh BzFmHUz2ctxQm7VChGfRuqlbN8VndKVT6obDeT4Ce520VLdnFhM2UBmUyZF+IPcCcBD7 +tH+sDQQ1oeAKVnLPwU1343yjm3VCO8BV1BdG3mjlz0N+JY4wnbSXK1E5YNdfudwuymH ZRjg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=sender:errors-to:cc:list-subscribe:list-help:list-post:list-archive :list-unsubscribe:list-id:precedence:mime-version:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:dkim-signature; bh=ZvZtlcJLaunnGOXBdcliIs2EDQn5NmuNKBEp/NkjPT4=; b=JvUVk/EfT+mDgea9a18vDQyCn+jOCG84EPiFSpA4w6i+2sIPFHezCcU9iNwlZleKFW jrlJuu87809m7lb06TmU6XvMhWcVwRbbV9B+D3dl1BStM0taXLATgTvkFOjBWhdlgLwe +n7yl8G5jGAK/jC3jx/BkztGO5ar/KQYnp/CejpeM2VJZZtSt9bYSpB74M7Y52Xb14gz JgagjOGuOdB9xJOuTjOLHxrvGTV1hX/o+y+18uIQ1fCaqSAdLM5Ia98MfFP0rJKoPgdX 6ACCiJXxWOmvH5IEjwUtmkhmywvR9Vbk65jZPngv9ZvC2fvAIlRYJ/l7TJPW9rKtZfpI 6WrQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@mutex.one header.s=default header.b=Ocogb1iB; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org" Return-Path: Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org. [209.51.188.17]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k14si317253ion.44.2021.03.23.15.39.47 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:39:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.51.188.17; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@mutex.one header.s=default header.b=Ocogb1iB; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org" Received: from localhost ([::1]:55990 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOpgg-0000hX-Rb for alex.bennee@linaro.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:39:46 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58526) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOpgQ-0000RS-2p; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:39:30 -0400 Received: from mail.mutex.one ([62.77.152.124]:40356) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lOpgO-00058s-IQ; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:39:29 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mutex.one (Postfix) with ESMTP id E558ABF42269; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 00:39:24 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.mutex.one Received: from mail.mutex.one ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mutex.one [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2phtxNXJBdfC; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 00:39:24 +0200 (EET) Received: [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])nknown [109.103.89.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.mutex.one (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 72AB3BF4225B; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 00:39:24 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mutex.one; s=default; t=1616539164; bh=IJx7G/epgcxZdJVsP5YE9q4AnG8gp1nQZKSg4j79GX4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=Ocogb1iB64c3RmBfVGym0vJBcHKcB4LLzV5tnFNS4YU5hNTY3viX6/RLUYdZU+odt sR/RMk+HnTK5fsgHy4RJgYJOl4Xfr6QgdCABni/MBYuxUoAUNrrvWvRLmfo62Dl129 YN5Vtnsgf43uMNhcfU+yloulKvzhHuhA/fVkDSdo= From: Marian Postevca To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] acpi: Consolidate the handling of OEM ID and OEM Table ID fields In-Reply-To: <20210322184231-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20210322215554.24875-1-posteuca@mutex.one> <20210322215554.24875-2-posteuca@mutex.one> <20210322184231-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 00:39:22 +0200 Message-ID: <87lfadsdet.fsf@mutex.one> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.77.152.124; envelope-from=posteuca@mutex.one; helo=mail.mutex.one X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-arm@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Maydell , Xiao Guangrong , Richard Henderson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Dongjiu Geng , Shannon Zhao , Xiang Zheng , qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Igor Mammedov , Paolo Bonzini , Eduardo Habkost Errors-To: qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-arm" X-TUID: 1Ya3sFHFfGtF "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: >> +#include "qemu/cutils.h" >> + >> +#define ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6 "BOCHS " >> +#define ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME8 "BXPC " > > A single user for each of these now ... drop the defines? > Unfortunately ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME8 is still used in build_header() in aml-build.c, and to me it didn't look nice for one to have a define and the other not, but if you prefer with only ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME8 as a define, I can do the change. >> +#define ACPI_INIT_DEFAULT_BUILD_OEM(__bld_oem) do { \ >> + ACPI_INIT_BUILD_OEM(__bld_oem, \ >> + ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME8); \ >> +} while (0) > > OK but ... why are these macros? Won't inline functions > work just as well with more type safety? > Didn't know what was the attitude in this project to inlined functions in headers and went with macros. I will change to inlined functions.