From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yijing Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/28] PCI: Introduce pci_host_assign_domain_nr() to assign domain Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 18:56:26 +0800 Message-ID: <54BCE2DA.1000405@huawei.com> References: <1421372666-12288-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <3026954.09KG7UaUTi@wuerfel> <54BC6894.6060500@huawei.com> <2124926.gSbG0l1jIy@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2124926.gSbG0l1jIy@wuerfel> Sender: linux-alpha-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Bjorn Helgaas , Liviu Dudau , Tony Luck , Russell King , Marc Zyngier , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Guan Xuetao , Yinghai Lu , Jiang Liu , Lorenzo Pieralisi On 2015/1/19 17:50, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 19 January 2015 10:14:44 Yijing Wang wrote: >>>> I'm confused: the same code is already part of the PCI tree, but with >>>> Lorenzo Pieralisi listed as the patch author. The code is good, >>>> and I acked it in the past, but one of you is (probably by accident) >>>> misattributing the patch. >>>> >>>> Assuming that the patch that is already merged in next is the right >>>> one, I think you should rebase your series on top of >>>> >>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git#next >>>> >>>> to avoid conflicts like this one. >>>> >>> >>> I think I just got confused because the code duplicates most of >>> pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(). Maybe this can be done in a better way >>> by splitting the existing function into >>> >>> static int pci_assign_domain_nr(struct device *) >>> { >>> ... /* most of pci_bus_assign_domain_nr */ >>> >>> return domain; >>> } >>> >>> void pci_host_assign_domain_nr(struct pci_host_bridge *host) >>> { >>> host->domain = pci_assign_domain_nr(host->dev.parent); >>> } >>> >>> void pci_bus_assign_domain_nr(struct pci_bus *bus, struct device *parent) >>> { >>> bus->domain_nr = pci_assign_domain_nr(parent); >>> } >>> >> >> Hi Arnd, >> I kept the almost duplicated pci_host_assign_domain_nr() and >> pci_bus_assign_domain_nr() here for building happy, because now >> platform specific pci_domain_nr() still exists which may get domain >> number from pci_bus. pci_bus_assign_domain_nr() will be removed in >> the last patch. >> > > I'm not sure I get your point: the approach I showed above seems to have > the same effect, except it doesn't duplicate code temporarily, which > makes it less error-prone in case your patch gets merged at the > same time as another patch that modifies pci_bus_assign_domain_nr. OK, I got it, will update it, thanks! Thanks! Yijing. > > Arnd > > . > -- Thanks! Yijing