From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D1F5248893; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 12:03:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744805001; cv=none; b=hsf+uK5m1gtlWDza9kfUKvmXxpM/ma4ZG5/On6PnG0O7PFjnNUMqA1ov40QwrZA6js2hVvNhnsPrvnow28riGsq0W1cybP+3YbGGJP0VDrurGFXH1fYt7tjjcr19HeB/smE3sy3V7jhXm/vU9Sp6VPY4/w/qVVFEYFlqkij/q78= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744805001; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Fd+W9CjO5d9kB35ZI0RnHNWj1wpgnArBWJxv+jgCc4o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=mdWz2aCixJApJQy4xUadOxOVmpA7Eh97e26Zw+boDh19eTz2jb02DvXSBWAdfwsY4LXAewypW5m6JJqZh2bqP10n9pzXg0syDZmNGZgGa6tC81GCg5UspAz5VAef4iZDvWuFND7OIwM4W+lgZiLjMi76/4ZapVApxN1uU+dAdpk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: JAcJZtEdTyuFSOW+X8JWYA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: pO2iESYQROaO8OlQSOUCzA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11404"; a="46238939" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,216,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="46238939" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by orvoesa111.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Apr 2025 05:03:19 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: rZsEcAhtTU+IXw8AkJz4MA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: ISgYA7SHRiGfC442U/jbNg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,216,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="135521346" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.58]) by fmviesa004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Apr 2025 05:03:17 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u51U1-0000000CqQW-00w5; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:03:13 +0300 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:03:12 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Ilpo =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E4rvinen?= Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86: Use resource_set_{range,size}() helpers Message-ID: References: <20250416101318.7313-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 02:53:51PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > On Wed, 16 Apr 2025, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 01:13:18PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > > + resource_set_range(res, 0xC0000, SZ_128K); > > > res->flags = IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_ROM_SHADOW | > > > IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED; > > > > I'm wondering why not DEFINE_RES_MEM() in such cases? > > I guess you meant DEFINE_RES() as that seems to allow giving custom flags. > However, DEFINE_RES*() will overwrite ->name which seems something that > ought to not be done here. Okay, I haven't checked the initial state of name field here, so then DEFINE_RES_MEM_NAMED()? Or don't we have one? In any case I would rather see a one assignment for these cases than something hidden behind proposed conversions. > I found one other case from the same file though which is truly defines > a resource from scratch. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko