Re: [RFC Patch 15/19] ACPI: Add field offset to struct resource_list_entry

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, January 08, 2015 10:33:02 AM Jiang Liu wrote:
> Add field offset to struct resource_list_entry to host address space
> translation offset so it could be used to represent bridge resources.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/resource.c |   13 ++++++++-----
>  include/linux/acpi.h    |    1 +
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> index 16d334a1ee25..54204ac94f8e 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> @@ -462,7 +462,8 @@ struct res_proc_context {
>  };
>  
>  static acpi_status acpi_dev_new_resource_entry(struct resource *r,
> -					       struct res_proc_context *c)
> +					       struct res_proc_context *c,
> +					       resource_size_t offset)
>  {
>  	struct resource_list_entry *rentry;
>  
> @@ -472,6 +473,7 @@ static acpi_status acpi_dev_new_resource_entry(struct resource *r,
>  		return AE_NO_MEMORY;
>  	}
>  	rentry->res = *r;
> +	rentry->offset = offset;
>  	list_add_tail(&rentry->node, c->list);
>  	c->count++;
>  	return AE_OK;
> @@ -480,6 +482,7 @@ static acpi_status acpi_dev_new_resource_entry(struct resource *r,
>  static acpi_status acpi_dev_process_resource(struct acpi_resource *ares,
>  					     void *context)
>  {
> +	resource_size_t offset = 0;
>  	struct res_proc_context *c = context;
>  	struct resource r;
>  	int i;
> @@ -500,14 +503,14 @@ static acpi_status acpi_dev_process_resource(struct acpi_resource *ares,
>  
>  	if (acpi_dev_resource_memory(ares, &r)
>  	    || acpi_dev_resource_io(ares, &r)
> -	    || acpi_dev_resource_address_space(ares, &r, NULL)
> -	    || acpi_dev_resource_ext_address_space(ares, &r, NULL))
> -		return acpi_dev_new_resource_entry(&r, c);
> +	    || acpi_dev_resource_address_space(ares, &r, &offset)
> +	    || acpi_dev_resource_ext_address_space(ares, &r, &offset))
> +		return acpi_dev_new_resource_entry(&r, c, offset);
>  
>  	for (i = 0; acpi_dev_resource_interrupt(ares, i, &r); i++) {
>  		acpi_status status;
>  
> -		status = acpi_dev_new_resource_entry(&r, c);
> +		status = acpi_dev_new_resource_entry(&r, c, 0);
>  		if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
>  			return status;
>  	}
> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> index bde8119f5897..fea78e772450 100644
> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -300,6 +300,7 @@ bool acpi_dev_resource_interrupt(struct acpi_resource *ares, int index,
>  struct resource_list_entry {
>  	struct list_head node;
>  	struct resource res;
> +	resource_size_t offset;

Well, so instead of adding the offset thing here and there, wouldn't it be
cleaner to introduce something like

	struct ext_resource {
		sturct resource res;
		resource_size_t offset;
	};

and use struct ext_resource instead of struct resource where an offset is needed?

Just a thought ...

>  };
>  
>  void acpi_dev_free_resource_list(struct list_head *list);
> 

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/