Export acpi_check_resource_conflict(), sometimes drivers already have
a struct resource at hand so no need to use the wrappers to build a new
one.
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
---
drivers/acpi/osl.c | 3 ++-
include/linux/acpi.h | 5 +++++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- linux-2.6.24-rc0.orig/drivers/acpi/osl.c 2007-10-21 14:36:08.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc0/drivers/acpi/osl.c 2007-10-21 14:36:13.000000000 +0200
@@ -1097,7 +1097,7 @@ __setup("acpi_enforce_resources=", acpi_
/* Check for resource conflicts between ACPI OperationRegions and native
* drivers */
-static int acpi_check_resource_conflict(struct resource *res)
+int acpi_check_resource_conflict(struct resource *res)
{
struct acpi_res_list *res_list_elem;
int ioport;
@@ -1147,6 +1147,7 @@ static int acpi_check_resource_conflict(
}
return 0;
}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_check_resource_conflict);
int acpi_check_region(resource_size_t start, resource_size_t n,
const char *name)
--- linux-2.6.24-rc0.orig/include/linux/acpi.h 2007-10-21 14:36:00.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc0/include/linux/acpi.h 2007-10-21 14:36:13.000000000 +0200
@@ -123,6 +123,8 @@ extern int pci_mmcfg_config_num;
extern int sbf_port;
extern unsigned long acpi_realmode_flags;
+int acpi_check_resource_conflict(struct resource *res);
+
int acpi_check_region(resource_size_t start, resource_size_t n,
const char *name);
int acpi_check_mem_region(resource_size_t start, resource_size_t n,
@@ -131,6 +133,9 @@ int acpi_check_mem_region(resource_size_
#define acpi_mp_config 0
+static inline int acpi_check_resource_conflict(struct resource *res)
+{ return 0; }
+
static inline int acpi_check_region(resource_size_t start, resource_size_t n,
const char *name) { return 0 };
--
Thomas Renninger
Research and Developement Departement
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH,
Maxfeldstr. 5, D - 90409 Nürnberg
Phone: +49 (0)911 - 740 53 675
e-mail: [email protected]
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:33:07 +0200 Thomas Renninger <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Thomas Renninger <[email protected]>
> To: linux-acpi <[email protected]>
> Cc: linux-kernel <[email protected]>, Len Brown <[email protected]>, Andrew Morton <[email protected]>, Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Fwd: [PATCH 3/5] Export acpi_check_resource_conflict]
> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:33:07 +0200
> Organization: Novell/SUSE
> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2
>
> Export acpi_check_resource_conflict(), sometimes drivers already have
> a struct resource at hand so no need to use the wrappers to build a new
> one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> ---
The attributions on this are all mucked up.
I _think_ it was written by Jean, in which case the changlog should
have had From:him right at the start to indicate this. And as you
were in the delivery path, it should have had your signoff.
I'll make those changes - please let me know if I misguessed.
Hi Andrew,
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:53:47 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:33:07 +0200 Thomas Renninger <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > From: Thomas Renninger <[email protected]>
> > To: linux-acpi <[email protected]>
> > Cc: linux-kernel <[email protected]>, Len Brown <[email protected]>, Andrew Morton <[email protected]>, Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> > Reply-To: [email protected]
> > Subject: [Fwd: [PATCH 3/5] Export acpi_check_resource_conflict]
> > Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:33:07 +0200
> > Organization: Novell/SUSE
> > X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2
> >
> > Export acpi_check_resource_conflict(), sometimes drivers already have
> > a struct resource at hand so no need to use the wrappers to build a new
> > one.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> > ---
>
> The attributions on this are all mucked up.
>
> I _think_ it was written by Jean, in which case the changlog should
> have had From:him right at the start to indicate this. And as you
> were in the delivery path, it should have had your signoff.
>
> I'll make those changes - please let me know if I misguessed.
You are correct, patches 3/5, 4/5 and 5/5 of this patchset were written
by me (as in: I'm the one to blame if something breaks). I expected
Thomas to add a From: header and add his own Signed-off-by line but
instead he forwarded my mails directly. Thanks for fixing up the mess,
we'll try to make it better next time.
--
Jean Delvare
On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 15:48 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:53:47 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:33:07 +0200 Thomas Renninger <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Thomas Renninger <[email protected]>
> > > To: linux-acpi <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: linux-kernel <[email protected]>, Len Brown <[email protected]>, Andrew Morton <[email protected]>, Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> > > Reply-To: [email protected]
> > > Subject: [Fwd: [PATCH 3/5] Export acpi_check_resource_conflict]
> > > Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:33:07 +0200
> > > Organization: Novell/SUSE
> > > X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.2
> > >
> > > Export acpi_check_resource_conflict(), sometimes drivers already have
> > > a struct resource at hand so no need to use the wrappers to build a new
> > > one.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> >
> > The attributions on this are all mucked up.
> >
> > I _think_ it was written by Jean, in which case the changlog should
> > have had From:him right at the start to indicate this. And as you
> > were in the delivery path, it should have had your signoff.
> >
> > I'll make those changes - please let me know if I misguessed.
>
> You are correct, patches 3/5, 4/5 and 5/5 of this patchset were written
> by me (as in: I'm the one to blame if something breaks). I expected
> Thomas to add a From: header and add his own Signed-off-by line but
> instead he forwarded my mails directly. Thanks for fixing up the mess,
> we'll try to make it better next time.
As said, I wasn't sure against what I should base all this.
I would had cleaned it up, depending on what you told me. I also didn't
know about the From: tag if you send patches not from your own, the next
time...
Anyways, it's nice to see how things can move on right away without much
delay and discussion.
Thanks,
Thomas