Re: [PATCH 14/23] PCI: add __pci_remove_bus_devices()

[Yinghai Lu]

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> will use it with pci_stop_and_remove_bus later.
>>
>> also remove __pci_remove_behind_bridge and pci_stop_behind_bridge.
>>
>> they are same except one take bridge and one take bus.
>>
>> and we already have pci_stop_bus_devices()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/pci/remove.c |   28 +++++++++++-----------------
>>  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/remove.c b/drivers/pci/remove.c
>> index 243d59b..62c348c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/remove.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/remove.c
>> @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ void pci_remove_bus(struct pci_bus *pci_bus)
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_remove_bus);
>>
>> -static void __pci_remove_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev);
>> +static void __pci_remove_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus);
>>  /**
>>  * pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device - remove a PCI device and any children
>>  * @dev: the device to remove
>> @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ void __pci_remove_bus_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>        if (dev->subordinate) {
>>                struct pci_bus *b = dev->subordinate;
>>
>> -               __pci_remove_behind_bridge(dev);
>> +               __pci_remove_bus_devices(b);
>>                pci_remove_bus(b);
>>                dev->subordinate = NULL;
>>        }
>> @@ -111,22 +111,12 @@ void pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>        __pci_remove_bus_device(dev);
>>  }
>>
>> -static void __pci_remove_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> +static void __pci_remove_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus)
>>  {
>>        struct list_head *l, *n;
>>
>> -       if (dev->subordinate)
>> -               list_for_each_safe(l, n, &dev->subordinate->devices)
>> -                       __pci_remove_bus_device(pci_dev_b(l));
>> -}
>> -
>> -static void pci_stop_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> -{
>> -       struct list_head *l, *n;
>> -
>> -       if (dev->subordinate)
>> -               list_for_each_safe(l, n, &dev->subordinate->devices)
>> -                       pci_stop_bus_device(pci_dev_b(l));
>> +       list_for_each_safe(l, n, &bus->devices)
>> +               __pci_remove_bus_device(pci_dev_b(l));
>
> Use list_for_each_entry_safe() so you don't need pci_dev_b().

just want to keep the patch to simple, and looks like just name renaming.

also use list_for_each_safe instead of list_for_each_entry_safe

could have less conversion.

>
>>  }
>>
>>  static void pci_stop_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> @@ -158,8 +148,12 @@ static void pci_stop_bus_devices(struct pci_bus *bus)
>>  */
>>  void pci_stop_and_remove_behind_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>  {
>> -       pci_stop_behind_bridge(dev);
>> -       __pci_remove_behind_bridge(dev);
>> +       struct pci_bus *bus = dev->subordinate;
>> +
>> +       if (bus) {
>
> Don't check "bus" here.  If the caller screws up and passes a
> non-bridge pointer, I want to learn about it rather than ignore it.

old code have that
           if (dev->subordinate)

checking.

Yinghai
--
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/