From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:44084 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753505AbaDGJbe (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Apr 2014 05:31:34 -0400 Message-ID: <1396862058.3671.40.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/6] pci: Introduce a domain number for pci_host_bridge. From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Liviu Dudau Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , linux-pci , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , linaro-kernel , Arnd Bergmann , LKML , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , LAKML , Tanmay Inamdar , Grant Likely Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 19:14:18 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20140407084623.GG17163@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1394811272-1547-1-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <1394811272-1547-5-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <20140405000007.GD15806@google.com> <20140407084623.GG17163@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 09:46 +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote: > > *My* strategy is to get rid of pci_domain_nr(). I don't see why we need > to have arch specific way of providing the number, specially after looking > at the existing implementations that return a value from a variable that > is never touched or incremented. My guess is that pci_domain_nr() was > created to work around the fact that there was no domain_nr maintainance in > the generic code. Well, there was no generic host bridge structure. There is one now, it should go there. Cheers, Ben.