From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hanjun.guo@linaro.org (Hanjun Guo) Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 12:06:43 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/7] ACPICA: Only include ACPI asm files if ACPI is enabled In-Reply-To: <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E88026203D0@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1401883796-17841-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1401883796-17841-2-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E88026203D0@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: <538FECD3.2000700@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Lv, On 2014-6-5 8:56, Zheng, Lv wrote: > Hi, Lee > >> From: Lee Jones [mailto:lee.jones at linaro.org] >> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 8:10 PM >> >> Any drivers which support ACPI and Device Tree probing need to include >> both respective header files. Without this patch, if a driver is being >> used on a platform which does not support ACPI and subsequently does not >> have the config option enabled, but includes linux/acpi.h the build >> breaks with: >> >> In file included from ../include/acpi/platform/acenv.h:150:0, >> from ../include/acpi/acpi.h:56, >> from ../include/linux/match.h:2, >> from ../drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c:43: >> ../include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h:73:23: >> fatal error: asm/acenv.h: No such file or directory >> #include >> ^ >> Cc: Lv Zheng >> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki >> Cc: linux-acpi at vger.kernel.org >> Cc: devel at acpica.org >> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones >> --- >> include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h | 5 +++-- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h b/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h >> index cd1f052..fdf7663 100644 >> --- a/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h >> +++ b/include/acpi/platform/aclinux.h >> @@ -70,9 +70,10 @@ >> #ifdef EXPORT_ACPI_INTERFACES >> #include >> #endif >> -#include >> >> -#ifndef CONFIG_ACPI >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI >> +#include >> +#else > > This is exactly what I want to do in the next step. > But you are a bit faster here. > I believe: > The miss-ordered inclusions of is the culprit of all of the miss-ordered inclusions in arch/x86/include/asm. > You should have noted that was originally unexpected included by some x86 specific headers. > Simply doing exlusion in this way might be able to fix your issue for your architecture, but it could be very likely breaking x86 builds. > You might be able to find another way to solve your build issue - for example, creating an empty for arch/arm. Yes, we solve this issue as you suggested for arch/arm64. since ARM32 will not support ACPI in the near future, we may find another way to fix it. Thanks Hanjun