From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix build when CONFIG_COMPAT disabled
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 15:47:25 +0000
Message-ID: <C1CC0C8D.77B4%keir@xensource.com>
References: <45A668F1.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <45A668F1.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Cc: John Levon <levon@movementarian.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org




On 11/1/07 15:42, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote:

> Properly conditionalize two places where compat-only structure fields get
> accessed, and avoid compiler warnings on unused variables in two other
> places.

Should we bother to #ifdef where we don't need to? It's ugly and the
compiler should be able to remove dead code where a condition evaluates to
zero at compile time: we already have IS_COMPAT(d) hardcoded to zero if
!CONFIG_COMPAT, which is enough to give the compiler a fair chance.

 -- Keir