From: "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
To: "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>
CC: "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
        "lenb@kernel.org" <lenb@kernel.org>,
        "mchehab@kernel.org" <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        "tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "rjw@rjwysocki.net" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v3 1/5] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_platform_list()
Thread-Index: AQHTGFwjnywryIINFUyGdWm/Gs0MS6KOsEQAgABU+oCAAAkSgIAAAqkA
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 17:23:37 +0000
Message-ID: <1503335626.2042.165.camel@hpe.com>
References: <20170818194644.14538-1-toshi.kani@hpe.com>
         <20170818194644.14538-2-toshi.kani@hpe.com>
         <20170821112657.hrtjoeagxhc67rrr@pd.tnic>
         <1503333107.2042.163.camel@hpe.com>
         <20170821170415.kttnqiwj2fkntsc7@pd.tnic>
In-Reply-To: <20170821170415.kttnqiwj2fkntsc7@pd.tnic>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <1AFD20AE55016A40A56A15FA9B076B89@NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Aug 2017 17:23:37.5705
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 105b2061-b669-4b31-92ac-24d304d195dc
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DF4PR84MB0316
X-OriginatorOrg: hpe.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by nfs id v7LHOYk4013810
Content-Length: 1885
Lines: 45

On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 19:04 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 04:41:38PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> > Putting to a single line leads to "line over 80 characters" warning
> > from checkpatch.pl.  Would you still advice to do that?
> 
> Yes, the 80 cols rule is not a hard one. Rather, it should be
> overridden by human good judgement, like making the code more
> readable.

I see.  I will make these changes.  (It's really personal preference,
but long lines of if-conditions are not so easy to read to my eyes,
though.)

> > strncmp() is fine without these, but it'd be prudent in case
> > someone decides to print these strings with printk().  Will do.
> 
> Someone does already use them in printk():
> 
> +               pr_err(PREFIX "Vendor \"%6.6s\" System \"%8.8s\"
> Revision 0x%x has a known ACPI BIOS problem.\n",
> +                      acpi_blacklist[i].oem_id,
> +                      acpi_blacklist[i].oem_table_id,
> +                      acpi_blacklist[i].oem_revision);

Oh, you are right about that!

> > 'data' here is private to the caller.  So, I do not think we need
> > to define the bits.  Shall I change the name to 'driver_data' to
> > make it more explicit?
> 
> You changed it to 'data'. It was a u32-used-as-boolean
> is_critical_error before.
> 
> So you can just as well make it into flags and people can extend
> those flags if needed. A flag bit should be enough in most cases
> anyway. If they really need driver_data, then they can add a void *
> member.

Hmm.. In patch 2, intel_pstate_platform_pwr_mgmt_exists() uses this
field for PSS and PCC, which are enum values.  I think we should allow
drivers to set any values here.  I agree that it may need to be void *
if we also allow drivers to set a pointer here.

Thanks,
-Toshi