From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1558789.gX8cmBgyDV@vostro.rjw.lan> <1832392.tD5dEjQMy4@vostro.rjw.lan> <2913597.xNs4ttWDNI@vostro.rjw.lan> From: Bjorn Helgaas Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:36:55 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Alternative 2][PATCH] ACPI / PCI: Set root bridge ACPI handle in advance To: Yinghai Lu Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , ACPI Devel Maling List , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML , Tony Luck , "H. Peter Anvin" , Jiang Liu , Myron Stowe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, January 04, 2013 04:03:01 PM Yinghai Lu wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h >>> >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h >>> >> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ >>> >> struct pci_sysdata { >>> >> int domain; /* PCI domain */ >>> >> int node; /* NUMA node */ >>> >> + void *acpi_handle; >>> >> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 >>> >> void *iommu; /* IOMMU private data */ >>> >> #endif >>> >> >>> >>> acpi_handle is not good name and it is confusing. >> >> Well, what would be a better name in your opinion? >> >> I was going to put that into a #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI / #endif, so what about >> calling it acpi_data? > > yes, with #ifdef, you can use acpi_handle type directly. > > it is acpi handle for pci_root. > > so would call int pci_root_acpi_handle ? I just copied the name from the corresponding ia64 code. I don't care if you want to change it, but I think there is *some* value in keeping the x86 and ia64 code as similar as possible because it would be nice to converge it some day. Bjorn