| Message ID | 20200713122247.10985-3-refactormyself@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | RFC |
| Delegated to: | Kalle Valo |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
On 7/13/20 7:22 AM, Saheed O. Bolarinwa wrote: > In reference to the PCI spec (Chapter 2), PCIBIOS* is an x86 concept. > Their scope should be limited within arch/x86. > > Change all PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL to 0 > > Signed-off-by: "Saheed O. Bolarinwa" <refactormyself@gmail.com> Could you please tell me what difference this makes? It looks like source churn rather than a substantive change. The symbol is defined in pci.h and is used in many architures. Certainly, PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL indicates success even more clearly than 0 does. Why is your name inside quotes in your s-o-b? Larry
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 8:13 PM Saheed Bolarinwa <refactormyself@gmail.com> wrote: > On 7/13/20 7:16 PM, Larry Finger wrote: > > > Why is your name inside quotes in your s-o-b? > > > To keep me company before I get to know my way within the kernel. > > I saw people with >2 names do it, so I did! Please let me know if it is odd. It's required for a proper email header if you have a dor (.) in your cleartext name, but it is not required in a Signed-off-by tag, though a number of people still do it out of habit. I'm sure it's fine either way. Arnd
On 7/13/20 2:13 PM, Saheed Bolarinwa wrote: > Hello Larry, > > On 7/13/20 7:16 PM, Larry Finger wrote: >> On 7/13/20 7:22 AM, Saheed O. Bolarinwa wrote: >>> In reference to the PCI spec (Chapter 2), PCIBIOS* is an x86 concept. >>> Their scope should be limited within arch/x86. >>> >>> Change all PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL to 0 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: "Saheed O. Bolarinwa" <refactormyself@gmail.com> >> >> Could you please tell me what difference this makes? It looks like source >> churn rather than a substantive change. The symbol is defined in pci.h and is >> used in many architures. Certainly, PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL indicates success even >> more clearly than 0 does. >> > It is a trivial first step towards a probably significant task. I explained in > the Cover Letter, I can see it didn't get through but I Cc linux-wireless > (properly this time). Probably, too many addresses. > > I have resent it. It is here > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/20200713185559.31967-1-refactormyself@gmail.com/T/#u > > >> Why is your name inside quotes in your s-o-b? >> > To keep me company before I get to know my way within the kernel. > > I saw people with >2 names do it, so I did! Please let me know if it is odd. > Thank you for the explanations. The cover letter did help. For both SSB and BMCA changes, Acked-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> Larry
Hello Larry, On 7/13/20 7:16 PM, Larry Finger wrote: > On 7/13/20 7:22 AM, Saheed O. Bolarinwa wrote: >> In reference to the PCI spec (Chapter 2), PCIBIOS* is an x86 concept. >> Their scope should be limited within arch/x86. >> >> Change all PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL to 0 >> >> Signed-off-by: "Saheed O. Bolarinwa" <refactormyself@gmail.com> > > Could you please tell me what difference this makes? It looks like > source churn rather than a substantive change. The symbol is defined > in pci.h and is used in many architures. Certainly, PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL > indicates success even more clearly than 0 does. > It is a trivial first step towards a probably significant task. I explained in the Cover Letter, I can see it didn't get through but I Cc linux-wireless (properly this time). Probably, too many addresses. I have resent it. It is here https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/20200713185559.31967-1-refactormyself@gmail.com/T/#u > Why is your name inside quotes in your s-o-b? > To keep me company before I get to know my way within the kernel. I saw people with >2 names do it, so I did! Please let me know if it is odd. Thank you. - Saheed
diff --git a/drivers/ssb/driver_gige.c b/drivers/ssb/driver_gige.c index ebee6b0e3c34..ccb4a35715bf 100644 --- a/drivers/ssb/driver_gige.c +++ b/drivers/ssb/driver_gige.c @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ static int ssb_gige_pci_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, } spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->lock, flags); - return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL; + return 0; } static int ssb_gige_pci_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ static int ssb_gige_pci_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, } spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->lock, flags); - return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL; + return 0; } static int ssb_gige_probe(struct ssb_device *sdev, diff --git a/drivers/ssb/driver_pcicore.c b/drivers/ssb/driver_pcicore.c index c1186415896b..1b67af1097c8 100644 --- a/drivers/ssb/driver_pcicore.c +++ b/drivers/ssb/driver_pcicore.c @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static int ssb_pcicore_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, PCI_FUNC(devfn), reg, val, size); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cfgspace_lock, flags); - return err ? PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND : PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL; + return err ? PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND : 0; } static int ssb_pcicore_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static int ssb_pcicore_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, PCI_FUNC(devfn), reg, &val, size); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cfgspace_lock, flags); - return err ? PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND : PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL; + return err ? PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND : 0; } static struct pci_ops ssb_pcicore_pciops = {
In reference to the PCI spec (Chapter 2), PCIBIOS* is an x86 concept. Their scope should be limited within arch/x86. Change all PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL to 0 Signed-off-by: "Saheed O. Bolarinwa" <refactormyself@gmail.com> --- drivers/ssb/driver_gige.c | 4 ++-- drivers/ssb/driver_pcicore.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)