[PATCH v2 21/39] acpi: Convert part of acpi_table to use acpi_ctx

[Simon Glass]

Hi Wolfgang,

On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 06:58, Wolfgang Wallner <
wolfgang.wallner at br-automation.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> -----"Simon Glass" <sjg at chromium.org> schrieb: -----
> >
> > The current code uses an address but a pointer would result in fewer
> > casts. Also it repeats the alignment code in a lot of places so this
would
> > be better done in a helper function.
> >
> > Update write_acpi_tables() to make use of the new acpi_ctx structure,
> > adding a few helpers to clean things up.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v2: None
> >
> >  arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> >  include/acpi_table.h      | 36 ++++++++++++++++
> >  lib/acpi/acpi_table.c     | 22 ++++++++++
> >  test/dm/acpi.c            | 28 +++++++++++++
> >  4 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
> >

[..]

> > +/**
> > + * acpi_align() - Align the ACPI output pointer to a 16-byte boundary
> > + *
> > + * @ctx: ACPI context
> > + */
> > +void acpi_align(struct acpi_ctx *ctx);
>
> Nit: The function names acpi_align() and acpi_align_large() are both vague
> on the exact alignment that is used.
> How about acpi_align16() and acpi_align64() ?

There is I think only one case where we use 64. Most of the time it is 16.
So I thought it was a bit silly to put 16 in the function name - it is the
standard alignment.

Perhaps I should use align() and align64()?

Regards,
Simon