Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: Rename host_bridge::reset_slot() to host_bridge::reset_root_port()

[Manivannan Sadhasivam]

On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 10:57:44PM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 12:23:04AM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > The callback is supposed to reset the root port, hence it should be named
> > as 'reset_root_port'. This also warrants renaming the rest of the instances
> > of 'reset slot' as 'reset root port' in the drivers.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c |  8 ++++----
> >  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c        |  8 ++++----
> >  drivers/pci/controller/pci-host-common.c      | 20 +++++++++----------
> >  drivers/pci/pci.c                             |  6 +++---
> >  include/linux/pci.h                           |  2 +-
> >  5 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
> > index 193e97adf228..0cc7186758ce 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
> > @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ struct rockchip_pcie_of_data {
> >  	const struct pci_epc_features *epc_features;
> >  };
> >  
> > -static int rockchip_pcie_rc_reset_slot(struct pci_host_bridge *bridge,
> > +static int rockchip_pcie_rc_reset_root_port(struct pci_host_bridge *bridge,
> >  				       struct pci_dev *pdev);
> >  
> >  static int rockchip_pcie_readl_apb(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip, u32 reg)
> > @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp)
> >  					 rockchip);
> >  
> >  	rockchip_pcie_enable_l0s(pci);
> > -	pp->bridge->reset_slot = rockchip_pcie_rc_reset_slot;
> > +	pp->bridge->reset_root_port = rockchip_pcie_rc_reset_slot;
> 
> You just renamed the function to rockchip_pcie_rc_reset_root_port(),
> but you seem to use the old name here, so I would guess that this will
> not compile.
> 

Yeah, I guess I exposed my sed skills here :P Will fix it up while applying.

> With the function pointer renamed, this patch looks good to me:
> Reviewed-by: Niklas Cassel <cassel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 

Thanks!

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்