All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Hitoshi Mitake <h.mitake@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Doug Thompson <norsk5@yahoo.com>,
	dougthompson@xmission.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] edac x38: new MC driver module
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 11:52:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081129105229.GA9643@uranus.ravnborg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081129192610.716a2d57.h.mitake@gmail.com>

> 
> But this is old way. ARCH_HAS_READQ and ARCH_HAS_WRITEQ are new ways
> to determine existence of readq/writeq. Drivers which use readq/writeq should
> depend on these values in their Kconfig file.

If we look at arch/x86/Kconfig we see:
### Arch settings
config X86
        def_bool y
        select HAVE_AOUT if X86_32
        select HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK
        select HAVE_IDE
        select HAVE_OPROFILE
        select HAVE_IOREMAP_PROT
        select HAVE_KPROBES
        select ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB
	...

So the normal syntax here is "HAVE_XXX_XXX" - not ARCH_HAS_XXX_XXX

If you update your patch please use this syntax,
and locate the select under X86 - not under the 32/64 entries.

But I do not see why adding these in the first place.

See following advice from Linus:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-arch&m=121710129310710&w=2

===> Quote:
I really think that whoever started that 'HAVE_ARCH_x'/'ARCH_HAS_x' mess 
with totally random symbols that have NOTHING WHAT-SO-EVER to do with the 
actual symbols in question (so they do _not_ show up in grep'ing for some 
use) should be shot. 

We should never _ever_ use that model. And we use it way too much.

We should generally strive for the simpler and much more obvious

	/* Generic definition */
	#ifndef symbol
	int symbol(..)
	...
	#endif

and then architecture code can do

	#define symbol(x) ...

or if they want to do a function, and you _really_ don't like the '__weak' 
part (or you want to make it an inline function and don't want the clash 
with the real declaration), then you can just do

	static inline int symbol(x)
	{
		...
	}
	#define symbol symbol

and again it all works fine WITHOUT having to introduce some idiotic new 
and unrelated element called ARCH_HAS_SYMBOL.

<====

	Sam

  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-29 10:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-29  0:56 [PATCH 1/1] edac x38: new MC driver module H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-29  0:56 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-29  7:47 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-29  7:47   ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-29  9:38   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-29 10:26     ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-29 10:52       ` Sam Ravnborg [this message]
2008-11-29 13:24         ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-29 18:01           ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-11-30  8:16             ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-30  8:37               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-30  8:37                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-30  9:24                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-30  9:24                   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-30 15:20                   ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-30 16:15                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-01 13:51                       ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-12-01 13:59                         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-01 23:58                           ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-12-04 15:58                             ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-01-16  1:24                               ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-21 10:11                             ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-21 10:39                               ` Russell King
2009-02-21 13:09                               ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-02-22 14:15                                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:16                                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:16                                   ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:16                                   ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:18                                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:18                                   ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:18                                   ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:19                                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:20                                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2009-02-22 14:21                                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-10-17 21:39 dougthompson
2008-10-20 23:32 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-05 22:29   ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-05 16:26     ` Doug Thompson
2008-11-07  0:46       ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-07 15:28         ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-07  6:31           ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-07 15:38             ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-07  7:11               ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-09 15:10                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-09 19:26                   ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-11  6:11                     ` Paul Mundt
2008-11-13 15:15                       ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-18 12:16                     ` Ralf Baechle
2008-11-18 12:32                       ` Russell King
2008-11-20 16:19                         ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-23 23:52                           ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-24 17:18                             ` Luck, Tony
2008-11-24 17:18                               ` Luck, Tony
2008-11-24 18:02                               ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-25  2:55                                 ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-25  5:13                                   ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-25 15:30                                     ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-25 15:46                                       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-11-25 16:10                                         ` Hitoshi Mitake
2008-11-29  0:11                                           ` Hitoshi Mitake

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20081129105229.GA9643@uranus.ravnborg.org \
    --to=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dougthompson@xmission.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=h.mitake@gmail.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=norsk5@yahoo.com \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.