From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F12E213398E; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 16:24:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708014301; cv=none; b=PsCFY5kd0PZHIyU+aiEgQhZbwCrX3luyOJalnQ4PCBBPKmhrtxlCRU+ZlbJDkvTiufhIH4149NKaCP/JykTeW2UEuda7xBKbdZqsLkZTyU3BncLk5pukMn7zXQWgTT/OYaItJAodk2IU8TIiZ1VlUIE9esezLKkx9azwRU7LTMY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708014301; c=relaxed/simple; bh=y72zgNWyZeqvq2fnQytbcWovVw76x4ueb74XOcjn0AY=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=pKshmvYOnD6UIsDxlogHHeG634UXe5P8RYNqRX7qnZBOIFZRN1gLEx6k/uvNxGTGgCR/Mfh5C/gDmGvGDGZfsMcBhrTvB5iZIehArvl8YaVrvhkR5u46xwe2Mov9srZq03GZ770SaQisliXEKMR6cCYxd9w36DY0KqWXarCS7YI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4TbL0S1YQ1z67T7Z; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:21:12 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.240]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D63B21400D4; Fri, 16 Feb 2024 00:24:56 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.202.227.76) by lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 16:24:56 +0000 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 16:24:55 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Dave Jiang CC: , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/12] base/node / ACPI: Enumerate node access class for 'struct access_coordinate' Message-ID: <20240215162455.00002e09@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20240206222951.1833098-3-dave.jiang@intel.com> References: <20240206222951.1833098-1-dave.jiang@intel.com> <20240206222951.1833098-3-dave.jiang@intel.com> Organization: Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.0 (GTK 3.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml500006.china.huawei.com (7.191.161.198) To lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 15:28:30 -0700 Dave Jiang wrote: > Both generic node and HMAT handling code have been using magic numbers to > indicate access classes for 'struct access_coordinate'. Introduce enums to > enumerate the access0 and access1 classes shared by the two subsystems. > Update the function parameters and callers as appropriate to utilize the > new enum. > > Access0 is named to ACCESS_COORDINATE_LOCAL in order to indicate that the > access class is for 'struct access_coordinate' between a target node and > the nearest initiator node. > > Access1 is named to ACCESS_COORDINATE_CPU in order to indicate that the > access class is for 'struct access_coordinate' between a target node and > the nearest CPU node. > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki > Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron I resisted bikeshedding on names. These are clear enough for me.