Re: [PATCH RFC v2 12/29] PCI/MSI: Introduce pcim_enable_msi*()family helpers

[Tejun Heo]

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 07:44:30PM +0100, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> 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 :)

Oh yeah, I agree but saw a place where @nvec is used for max.  Maybe I
was confused.  Looking again...

+int pcim_enable_msi_range(struct pci_dev *dev, struct msix_entry *entries,
+                         unsigned int nvec, unsigned int minvec)
+
+This variation on pci_enable_msi_block() call allows a device driver to
+request any number of MSIs within specified range minvec to nvec. Whenever
+possible device drivers are encouraged to use this function rather than
+explicit request loop calling pci_enable_msi_block().

e.g. shouldn't that @nvec be @maxvec?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/