Re: [PATCH] cxl/acpi: Fix CXL_ACPI and CXL_PMEM Kconfig tristate mismatch

[Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>]

On Thu, 5 Mar 2026 17:55:43 -0800
dan.j.williams@intel.com wrote:

> Keith Busch wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 05:07:28PM -0800, dan.j.williams@intel.com wrote:  
> > > > The call from cxl_acpi_probe() is guarded by
> > > > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CXL_PMEM), which evaluates to true for both =y and =m.  
> > 
> > <snip>
> >   
> > > So I do not think this is sufficient because there is no
> > > devm_cxl_add_nvdimm_bridge() stub in the CONFIG_CXL_PMEM=n case, right?  
> > 
> > It's called from a preprocesser "#if 0" section, so it shouldn't be
> > compiled in. At least it seems perfectly fine in local testing, but is
> > that compiler specific? I think this should have been optimized out.  
> 
> Oh, duh, yes, the IS_ENABLED() stays there. Hmm, this indeed looks like
> it does everything right. I forgot that the dependency checker will make
> sure that you can not select CXL_ACPI=y and CXL_PMEM=m.
> 
> So,
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> 
> ...this is better than what I proposed.
> 
I prefer Keith's solution to Gregory's just because of removing a surprising foot gun.

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>