Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1587387114-38475-1-git-send-email-ani@anisinha.ca> <20200420175734.GA53587@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200420175734.GA53587@google.com>
From:   Ani Sinha <ani@anisinha.ca>
Date:   Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:31:47 +0530
Message-ID: <CAARzgwzjqgqJY4+MdHCYEKOKxxVbt_d3C-fMwKtjSSFOnw+PqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: pciehp: remove unused EMI() macro
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ani Sinha <ani@anirban.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
        Frederick Lawler <fred@fredlawl.com>,
        Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:27 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Ani,
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 06:21:41PM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote:
> > EMI() macro seems to be unused. So removing it. Thanks
> > Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> for
> > pointing it out.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ani Sinha <ani@anisinha.ca>
> > ---
> >  drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp.h | 1 -
> >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp.h b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp.h
> > index 5747967..4fd200d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp.h
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp.h
> > @@ -148,7 +148,6 @@ struct controller {
> >  #define MRL_SENS(ctrl)               ((ctrl)->slot_cap & PCI_EXP_SLTCAP_MRLSP)
> >  #define ATTN_LED(ctrl)               ((ctrl)->slot_cap & PCI_EXP_SLTCAP_AIP)
> >  #define PWR_LED(ctrl)                ((ctrl)->slot_cap & PCI_EXP_SLTCAP_PIP)
> > -#define EMI(ctrl)            ((ctrl)->slot_cap & PCI_EXP_SLTCAP_EIP)
>
> Thanks for the patch!  Can you squash it together with the HP_SUPR_RM
> removal (and also check for any other unused ones at the same time)?
> For trivial things like this, I'd rather merge one patch that removes
> several unused things at once instead of several patches.
>
> I like the subject of this one ("Removed unused ..."), but please
> capitalize it as you did for the HP_SUPR_RM one so it matches previous
> history.

I have sent an updated patch few days back.

ani