On 5/20/2015 4:34 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 11:27:54AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Wednesday 20 May 2015 10:24:15 Catalin Marinas wrote:

quoted

On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 01:59:00AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

quoted

On Friday, May 15, 2015 04:23:11 PM Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:

quoted

+/**
+ * pci_dma_configure - Setup DMA configuration
+ * @pci_dev: ptr to pci_dev struct of the PCI device
+ *
+ * Function to update PCI devices's DMA configuration using the same
+ * info from the OF node or ACPI node of host bridge's parent (if any).
+ */
+static void pci_dma_configure(struct pci_dev *pci_dev)
+{
+   struct device *dev = &pci_dev->dev;
+   struct device *bridge = pci_get_host_bridge_device(pci_dev);
+   struct device *host = bridge->parent;
+   struct acpi_device *adev;
+
+   if (!host)
+           return;
+
+   if (acpi_disabled) {
+           of_dma_configure(dev, host->of_node);

I'd rather do

       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && host->of_node) {
               of_dma_configure(dev, host->of_node);

Nitpick: do we need the CONFIG_OF check? If disabled, I don't think
anyone would set host->of_node.

If of_dma_configure() is defined in a file that is built conditionally
based on CONFIG_OF, you need it.

We have a dummy of_dma_configure() already when !CONFIG_OF, otherwise
we would need #ifndef here. I already replied, I think for other
architectures we need this check to avoid a useless host->of_node test.

It seems that there are several places that have similar check. Would it 
be good to convert this into a macro? Something like:

#define OF_NODE_ENABLED(dev)	(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node)

Thanks all for the review feedback.

Suravee