| Message ID | alpine.DEB.2.10.1604251121590.4855@sstabellini-ThinkPad-X260 |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:25:11AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > > Improve the readability of dt_scan_depth1_nodes by removing the nested > conditionals. > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> > > --- > > Note: this patch is based on xentip/for-linus-4.7 So how should I merge it? :/ Will > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c > index 57ee317..6884c76 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c > @@ -66,17 +66,24 @@ static int __init dt_scan_depth1_nodes(unsigned long node, > void *data) > { > /* > - * Return 1 as soon as we encounter a node at depth 1 that is > - * not the /chosen node, or /hypervisor node with compatible > - * string "xen,xen". > + * Ignore anything not directly under the root node; we'll > + * catch its parent instead. > */ > - if (depth == 1 && (strcmp(uname, "chosen") != 0)) { > - if (strcmp(uname, "hypervisor") != 0 || > - !of_flat_dt_is_compatible(node, "xen,xen")) > - return 1; > - } > + if (depth != 1) > + return 0; > > - return 0; > + if (strcmp(uname, "chosen") == 0) > + return 0; > + > + if (strcmp(uname, "hypervisor") == 0 && > + of_flat_dt_is_compatible(node, "xen,xen")) > + return 0; > + > + /* > + * This node at depth 1 is neither a chosen node nor a xen node, > + * which we do not expect. > + */ > + return 1; > } > > /* >
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:04:53PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:25:11AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > > > > > > Improve the readability of dt_scan_depth1_nodes by removing the nested > > > conditionals. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Note: this patch is based on xentip/for-linus-4.7 > > > > So how should I merge it? :/ > > I think that if you would like to merge it, it would be easier this time > for me to carry it in my tree. Otherwise you would have to base your > for-linus-4.7 on xentip/for-linus-4.7 and send the pull request after > the Xen pull request -- undesirable. Ok, doesn't look like we'll run into conflicts. I just find it weird that you'd have a patch with no functional change as a dependency, hence my preference to queue it in the arm64 tree (where conflicts are more likely). Will
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:24:03PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:04:53PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:25:11AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > > From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > > > > > > > > > > Improve the readability of dt_scan_depth1_nodes by removing the nested > > > > > conditionals. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Note: this patch is based on xentip/for-linus-4.7 > > > > > > > > So how should I merge it? :/ > > > > > > I think that if you would like to merge it, it would be easier this time > > > for me to carry it in my tree. Otherwise you would have to base your > > > for-linus-4.7 on xentip/for-linus-4.7 and send the pull request after > > > the Xen pull request -- undesirable. > > > > Ok, doesn't look like we'll run into conflicts. I just find it weird that > > you'd have a patch with no functional change as a dependency, hence my > > preference to queue it in the arm64 tree (where conflicts are more likely). > > I see, that makes sense. In that case, would you be happy to take: > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/xen/tip.git/commit/?h=for-linus-4.7&id=df115bb0a0b8ad2f6dc62f8d094c21e77b367e7c > > in your tree? That would get rid of any cross dependecies between the > two tree. I can take that and the other patch on top too. Will
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c index 57ee317..6884c76 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c @@ -66,17 +66,24 @@ static int __init dt_scan_depth1_nodes(unsigned long node, void *data) { /* - * Return 1 as soon as we encounter a node at depth 1 that is - * not the /chosen node, or /hypervisor node with compatible - * string "xen,xen". + * Ignore anything not directly under the root node; we'll + * catch its parent instead. */ - if (depth == 1 && (strcmp(uname, "chosen") != 0)) { - if (strcmp(uname, "hypervisor") != 0 || - !of_flat_dt_is_compatible(node, "xen,xen")) - return 1; - } + if (depth != 1) + return 0; - return 0; + if (strcmp(uname, "chosen") == 0) + return 0; + + if (strcmp(uname, "hypervisor") == 0 && + of_flat_dt_is_compatible(node, "xen,xen")) + return 0; + + /* + * This node at depth 1 is neither a chosen node nor a xen node, + * which we do not expect. + */ + return 1; } /*