Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] ACPI: Drop parent field from struct acpi_device

From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>,
	Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
	Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>, Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@gmail.com>,
	Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@intel.com>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
	Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@gmail.com>,
	linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] ACPI: Drop parent field from struct acpi_device
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 17:54:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5617470.DvuYhMxLoT@kreacher> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a0cab176-3c3a-707a-02c3-74ffc1b4926e@huawei.com>

On Saturday, August 27, 2022 3:19:33 PM CEST Hanjun Guo wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> On 2022/8/25 0:59, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Index: linux-pm/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
> > +++ linux-pm/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
> > @@ -365,7 +365,6 @@ struct acpi_device {
> >   	int device_type;
> >   	acpi_handle handle;		/* no handle for fixed hardware */
> >   	struct fwnode_handle fwnode;
> > -	struct acpi_device *parent;
> >   	struct list_head wakeup_list;
> >   	struct list_head del_list;
> >   	struct acpi_device_status status;
> > @@ -458,6 +457,14 @@ static inline void *acpi_driver_data(str
> >   #define to_acpi_device(d)	container_of(d, struct acpi_device, dev)
> >   #define to_acpi_driver(d)	container_of(d, struct acpi_driver, drv)
> >   
> > +static inline struct acpi_device *acpi_dev_parent(struct acpi_device *adev)
> > +{
> > +	if (adev->dev.parent)
> > +		return to_acpi_device(adev->dev.parent);
> > +
> > +	return NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> >   static inline void acpi_set_device_status(struct acpi_device *adev, u32 sta)
> >   {
> >   	*((u32 *)&adev->status) = sta;
> > @@ -478,6 +485,7 @@ void acpi_initialize_hp_context(struct a
> >   /* acpi_device.dev.bus == &acpi_bus_type */
> >   extern struct bus_type acpi_bus_type;
> >   
> > +struct acpi_device *acpi_dev_parent(struct acpi_device *adev);
> 
> We have a static inline function above, is it duplicated here?
> Or did I miss some use cases?

No, you didn't, it is redundant.

I've just sent a fix for this.

Thanks!

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel