From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-acpi] [RFC PATCH for Juno 1/2] net: smsc911x add support
 for probing from ACPI
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 17:53:33 +0100
Message-ID: <20140901165333.GE608@arm.com>
References: <1409583961-7466-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <1409583961-7466-2-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <2861461.8zNpLC3I2n@wuerfel>
 <20140901152854.GJ2953@xora-haswell.xora.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from fw-tnat.austin.arm.com ([217.140.110.23]:14540 "EHLO
	collaborate-mta1.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751110AbaIAQxp (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 1 Sep 2014 12:53:45 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140901152854.GJ2953@xora-haswell.xora.org.uk>
Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
To: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>, Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>, Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Robert Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>, Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com>

On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 04:28:54PM +0100, Graeme Gregory wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 05:17:51PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 01 September 2014 23:06:00 Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > > +/* Configure some sensible defaults for ACPI mode */
> > > +static int smsc911x_probe_config_acpi(struct smsc911x_platform_config *config,
> > > +                                   acpi_handle *ahandle)
> > > +{
> > > +       if (!ahandle)
> > > +               return -ENOSYS;
> > > +
> > > +       config->phy_interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII;
> > > 
> > 
> > Please remove the #ifdef and use 
> > 
> > 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI) || !ahandle)
> > 
> > to check for ACPI support. This should result in the same object code
> > in all cases, but give better compile-time coverage when ACPI is
> > disabled.
> > 
> struct acpi_handle does not exist in the case !CONFIG_ACPI

Confused. Then how come smsc911x_drv_probe() has this line:

	acpi_handle *ahandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev);

without any #ifdef's.

-- 
Catalin