From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:29726 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755521Ab3KVSmi (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 22 Nov 2013 13:42:38 -0500
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 19:44:30 +0100
From: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
	Mark Lord <kernel@start.ca>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 12/29] PCI/MSI: Introduce pcim_enable_msi*()
 family helpers
Message-ID: <20131122184429.GG8401@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com>
References: <cover.1382103786.git.agordeev@redhat.com>
 <6bc575621ef70f72b206e4aa944acd32f1a75718.1382103786.git.agordeev@redhat.com>
 <20131120171526.GL28946@htj.dyndns.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <20131120171526.GL28946@htj.dyndns.org>
Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-pci.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 12:15:26PM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> The use of @nvec and @maxvec is a bit inconsistent.  Maybe it'd be
> better to make them uniform?

With @maxvec I tried to stress an implication there could be values
less than @maxvec. While @nvec is more like an exact number.
Perfectly makes sense to me, but this is personal :)

> tejun

-- 
Regards,
Alexander Gordeev
agordeev@redhat.com