From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
len.brown@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.16-rc6 calls check_acpi_pci() on x86 with ACPI disabled
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:06:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060314180651.5103928f.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060315015318.GA24945@MAIL.13thfloor.at>
Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 05:45:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Herbert Poetzl <herbert@13thfloor.at> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Andrew! Folks!
> > >
> > > check_acpi_pci() is called form arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
> > > even if CONFIG_ACPI is not defined, but the code in
> > > include/asm/acpi.h doesn't provide it in this case,
> >
> > Well that's a shame.
> >
> > > so either we need to move the declaration outside the
> > > CONFIG_ACPI check, or alternatively move the call in
> > > setup.c inside the CONFIG_ACPI one
> > >
> > > attached two patches which would do this
> >
> > Prefer the first version. But it'll break if CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC &&
> > !CONFIG_ACPI
> >
> > So how's about this?
>
> hmm, well, the comment around the check_acpi_pci() call
> says: "Checks more than just ACPI actually", so I didn't
> want to make it depend on ACPI in the 'first' version,
> which now would change semantics, but if it is fine to
> make it depend on ACPI, the second version might be the
> simpler solution (which should have the same semantic as
> your version ... I think
>
> maybe the ACPI folks should clarify if this stuff has to
> be run if ACPI is off, in which case renaming the thing
> might be a good idea ...
Yes, actually I didn't check closely enough - arch/i386/kernel/acpi/* gets
built even if CONFIG_ACPI=n (!)
So the code will actualy compile and link OK if we do:
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC
extern void check_acpi_pci(void);
#else
static inline void check_acpi_pci(void) { }
#endif
But we'd need the acpi guys to tell us what's actually intended here,
please. Does it make sense to be calling this function in a non-ACPI
kernel?
erk, your patch was against include/asm/... - please don't do that - it
doesn't work very well if the patch receiver isn't using a setup-for-i386
tree.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-15 2:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20060315013125.GA24402@MAIL.13thfloor.at>
2006-03-15 1:45 ` [PATCH] 2.6.16-rc6 calls check_acpi_pci() on x86 with ACPI disabled Andrew Morton
2006-03-15 1:53 ` Herbert Poetzl
2006-03-15 2:06 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2006-03-15 2:13 ` Herbert Poetzl
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=20060314180651.5103928f.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=herbert@13thfloor.at \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox