[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] hw/i386/ich9: add comment explaining an argument to acpi_pci
From: |
Ani Sinha |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] hw/i386/ich9: add comment explaining an argument to acpi_pcihp_reset call |
Date: |
Wed, 4 Aug 2021 18:49:53 +0530 (IST) |
User-agent: |
Alpine 2.22 (DEB 394 2020-01-19) |
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 10:15:46AM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote:
> > acpi_pcihp_reset() call from ich9/pm_reset() passes an unconditional truth
> > value
> > as the second argument. Added a commnet here to explain the reason why the
> > argument is being passed unconditionally.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ani Sinha <ani@anisinha.ca>
> > ---
> > hw/acpi/ich9.c | 5 +++++
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/acpi/ich9.c b/hw/acpi/ich9.c
> > index 778e27b659..b2e3c46075 100644
> > --- a/hw/acpi/ich9.c
> > +++ b/hw/acpi/ich9.c
> > @@ -281,6 +281,11 @@ static void pm_reset(void *opaque)
> > pm->smi_en_wmask = ~0;
> >
> > if (pm->use_acpi_hotplug_bridge) {
> > + /*
> > + * PCI Express root buses do not support hot-plug, for
> > + * details see docs/pcie.txt. Hence, the second argument
> > + * is unconditionally true.
> > + */
> > acpi_pcihp_reset(&pm->acpi_pci_hotplug, true);
> > }
>
>
> I don't see this comment as especially elluminating, sorry.
Ok fine. I do not feel strongly about this one either.
Ani