From patchwork Wed Apr 17 13:19:00 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jonathan Cameron X-Patchwork-Id: 13633349 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79F20C4345F for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 13:23:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Message-ID:Date:Subject:CC:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=O9cG4v55F4zklND24rChfIHAw+Odg0GfrsiVMH4+PJA=; b=VfIQE8J+xouJIO h3abdGEiUySfbwLQbKvcZXwmHSPMDdrpfotUhnAnQ0OCFlUknjlfFG8jSW89iBfFk3ODEY6kb8LZE xaiRqzgeXvCYR5Uh++AorZ8T23VYknyX5nkAIk/BHpRJsS6VrZGRxDHYUCwwSpigZZWBzsrC7YGRR cZCNeIVqKVVrbecWTsTK2jNKFcfRZrMuIIVV0tWiKU9VgNnbMRocFraxR3+Nq6u+QEJoDHTtygxF4 6/yE/JLE4bnXsvOsx5uemVhcJxT7RsyLBCbk97q0s4GzcocFjHZoo0Mpl/L+5hR9gGVOE507UAT9s b1MZaHN9ov2Zk7pS9J1w==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rx5FS-0000000G6xk-2rYt; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 13:22:50 +0000 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com ([185.176.79.56]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rx5FP-0000000G6vS-1Rmj for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 13:22:49 +0000 Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.31]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4VKM0C6Nc2z6K7GV; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 21:17:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.240]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8333E140C9C; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 21:22:45 +0800 (CST) Received: from SecurePC-101-06.china.huawei.com (10.122.247.231) by lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:22:44 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , , , , , , , , , Russell King , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Miguel Luis , James Morse , Salil Mehta , Jean-Philippe Brucker , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon CC: Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , , , Subject: [PATCH v6 07/16] ACPI: scan: switch to flags for acpi_scan_check_and_detach(); Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:19:00 +0100 Message-ID: <20240417131909.7925-8-Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2 In-Reply-To: <20240417131909.7925-1-Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> References: <20240417131909.7925-1-Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [10.122.247.231] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml500001.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.213) To lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240417_062247_823784_CFE2AE74 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 14.77 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Precursor patch adds the ability to pass a uintptr_t of flags into acpi_scan_check_and detach() so that additional flags can be added to indicate whether to defer portions of the eject flow. The new flag follows in the next patch. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron --- v6: Based on internal feedback switch to less invasive change to using flags rather than a struct. v5: New patch resulting from rebase. - Internal review suggested we could also do this with flags so I'm looking for feedback on which option people find more readable. --- drivers/acpi/scan.c | 17 ++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c index d1464324de95..1ec9677e6c2d 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c @@ -244,13 +244,16 @@ static int acpi_scan_try_to_offline(struct acpi_device *device) return 0; } -static int acpi_scan_check_and_detach(struct acpi_device *adev, void *check) +#define ACPI_SCAN_CHECK_FLAG_STATUS BIT(0) + +static int acpi_scan_check_and_detach(struct acpi_device *adev, void *p) { struct acpi_scan_handler *handler = adev->handler; + uintptr_t flags = (uintptr_t)p; - acpi_dev_for_each_child_reverse(adev, acpi_scan_check_and_detach, check); + acpi_dev_for_each_child_reverse(adev, acpi_scan_check_and_detach, p); - if (check) { + if (flags & ACPI_SCAN_CHECK_FLAG_STATUS) { acpi_bus_get_status(adev); /* * Skip devices that are still there and take the enabled @@ -288,7 +291,9 @@ static int acpi_scan_check_and_detach(struct acpi_device *adev, void *check) static void acpi_scan_check_subtree(struct acpi_device *adev) { - acpi_scan_check_and_detach(adev, (void *)true); + uintptr_t flags = ACPI_SCAN_CHECK_FLAG_STATUS; + + acpi_scan_check_and_detach(adev, (void *)flags); } static int acpi_scan_hot_remove(struct acpi_device *device) @@ -2601,7 +2606,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_bus_scan); */ void acpi_bus_trim(struct acpi_device *adev) { - acpi_scan_check_and_detach(adev, NULL); + uintptr_t flags = 0; + + acpi_scan_check_and_detach(adev, (void *)flags); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_bus_trim);