From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [103.22.144.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3znd6j13lHzF1kQ for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:10:21 +1100 (AEDT) From: Michael Ellerman To: Bjorn Helgaas , "Bryant G. Ly" Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, ruscur@russell.cc, jjalvare@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/AER: Move pci_uevent_ers() out of pci.h In-Reply-To: <20180222231236.GB14632@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> References: <20180208122035.9305-1-mpe@ellerman.id.au> <20180222231236.GB14632@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:10:18 +1100 Message-ID: <87h8q8pcr9.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Bjorn Helgaas writes: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 09:05:45AM -0600, Bryant G. Ly wrote: >> >> On 2/8/18 6:20 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> >> > There's no reason pci_uevent_ers() needs to be inline in pci.h, so >> > move it out to a C file. >> > >> > Given it's used by AER the obvious location would be somewhere in >> > drivers/pci/pcie/aer, but because it's also used by powerpc EEH code >> > unfortunately that doesn't work in the case where EEH is enabled but >> > PCIEPORTBUS is not. >> > >> > So for now put it in pci-driver.c, next to pci_uevent(), with an >> > appropriate #ifdef so it's not built if AER and EEH are both disabled. >> > >> > While we're moving it also fix up the kernel doc comment for @pdev to >> > be accurate. >> > >> > Reported-by: Linus Torvalds >> > Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman >> > --- >> > drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > include/linux/pci.h | 38 +++----------------------------------- >> > 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) >> >> Looks good, thanks for fixing it! >> >> Signed-off-by: Bryant G. Ly > > This would normally be a "Reviewed-by" unless you actually > participated in developing the patch, and in that case, your > "Signed-off-by" would normally be included in the original posting. > > What do you intend? I'll be glad to add either. I wrote the patch, so Bryant meant Reviewed-by or maybe Acked-by. cheers