From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the xen-two tree with Linus' tree Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:55:20 -0400 Message-ID: <20121002125519.GB9009@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <20121002141949.f6e61437bdce0d56d9d4321e@canb.auug.org.au> <506AEE0C020000780009F0A1@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <506AF20C020000780009F0B5@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]:18702 "EHLO rcsinet15.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753174Ab2JBNG5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:06:57 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <506AF20C020000780009F0B5@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Jan Beulich Cc: Stefano Stabellini , Stephen Rothwell , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:54:20PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 02.10.12 at 13:45, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > >> > Considering that dbgp doesn't seem to be very useful without PCI at the > >> > moment, could we just turn it into: > >> > > >> > dom0-$(CONFIG_PCI) += dbgp.o > >> > > >> > ? > >> > >> Better not - the code is specifically not PCI-only. And I can't see > >> how it would be harmful to be compiled on e.g. ARM (so the > >> merge perhaps really should use XEN_DOM0 alone, without > >> X86. If anything (and that may indeed be a minor oversight of > >> the original patch) one might want it to depend on USB_SUPPORT, > >> as without that no in-tree debug port capable driver would be > >> able to load (and hence interfere with Xen's use of the debug > >> port). However, as long as it builds fine with USB_SUPPORT > >> undefined (which I believe it does), having it in the shape it > >> is allows for out-of-tree drivers as well (as long as they make > >> use of the designated interface). > > > > OK for PCI. > > Regarding USB_SUPPORT, considering that gbgp.c calls hcd_to_bus, I think > > it would make sense to make it depend on it. > > As said - I'd prefer to do that only if indeed needed to get things > to build without that option. Since include/usb/* doesn't reference > CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT, I'm in favor of supporting at least those > eventual out-of-tree drivers that do use the pre-existing data > structures (and others shouldn't be calling pre-existing APIs > anyway). But I wouldn't NAK a patch doing what you suggest > either. Could it depend on EARLY_PRINTK_DBGP ? > > Jan