Re: [PATCH v13 7/9] ACPI: Translate the I/O range of non-MMIO devices before scanning

[John Garry]

On 16/02/2018 14:42, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:07 PM, John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 14/02/2018 16:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > +       list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node)
> > > > > > > > > +               resources[count++] = *rentry->res;
> > > > >
> > > > > > > It has similarities with acpi_create_platform_device().
> > > > > > > I guess we can utilize existing code.
> > > >
> > > > > For sure, this particular segment is effectively same as part of
> > > > > acpi_create_platform_device():
> > >
> > > Not the same, acpi_create_platform_device() does a bit more than
> > > copying the resources. If it indeed makes no hurt...
> > >
> > > > >         list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node)
> > > > >             acpi_platform_fill_resource(adev, rentry->res,
> > > > >                             &resources[count++]);
> > > > > So is your idea to refactor this common segment into a helper function?
> > >
> > > ...I would go with helper.
> >
> > Hi Andy,
> >
> > Since the plan now is that this code is no longer going to be added to
> > drivers/acpi, but instead pushed to the LLDD, I am pondering whether we
> > should still factor out of this common code. Opinion?
>
> I would still go with a common helper. Though, as first step, we can
> make it lazy, i.e. put a comment in your code, like a todo notice (w/o
> TODO word :-) ) to consider a common helper.

Fine, I was also thinking that I don't want to do this now as it could 
make merging the patchset more complex. For now, the ACPI change I plan 
creates no dependencies.

Cheers,
John

>