From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sinan Kaya Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ACPI: Allow PCI to be disabled for reboot Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 11:54:39 -0500 Message-ID: <4aa65942-bf97-c957-7f77-38bfdf7d1d3a@kernel.org> References: <20181208214644.5374-1-okaya@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 12/11/2018 5:12 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Sinan Kaya wrote: >> >> Make PCI reboot conditional on PCI support being present on the kernel >> configuration. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya > > Same comment as for patch [2/3]: make the subject say clearly that > this is about CONFIG_PCI. Sure >> case ACPI_ADR_SPACE_PCI_CONFIG: >> + { >> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI >> + unsigned int devfn; >> + struct pci_bus *bus0; >> + >> /* The reset register can only live on bus 0. */ >> bus0 = pci_find_bus(0, 0); >> if (!bus0) >> @@ -45,7 +48,10 @@ void acpi_reboot(void) >> pci_bus_write_config_byte(bus0, devfn, >> (rr->address & 0xffff), reset_value); >> break; >> - >> +#else >> + return; > > Why not "break"? > I struggled between break and return. Existing code seems to return on failure when bus0 is NULL. I assumed it would be more logical to return as someone could put some code after here that assumes everything is in order.