From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753227AbcFFOgP (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:36:15 -0400 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:49029 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752687AbcFFOgM convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:36:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/2] xen-pciback: drop rom_init() To: Jan Beulich References: <57554B8D02000078000F1DE4@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <575554CC02000078000F1E3F@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <5755761D.4020204@oracle.com> <57559CBD02000078000F20EC@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Cc: David Vrabel , xen-devel , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Juergen Gross , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Boris Ostrovsky Message-ID: <57558A4C.1040107@oracle.com> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:35:56 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57559CBD02000078000F20EC@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/06/2016 09:54 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 06.06.16 at 15:09, wrote: >> On 06/06/2016 04:47 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> It's identical to bar_init() now. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >>> --- >>> I'm sorry for this 3/2 - I only now noticed that this additional >>> simplification is now possible. >> I wonder whether we should also move content of read_dev_bar() into >> bar_init(). Especially given that it's not really reading a BAR but >> rather initializing the stashed value. > I had considered that too, but then thought the splitting out of > that logic could as well stay. If we were to do that, I'd in fact > prefer merging patches 2 and 3 (plus this additional adjustment). If you could do that it would be great. (Again, mostly because I think the name is misleading and renaming it to something like dev_bar_init() would also not be good since we already have bar_init()). Thanks. -boris