From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:59574 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755657AbeARSgM (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:36:12 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:36:00 +0000 From: Lorenzo Pieralisi To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Niklas Cassel , Bjorn Helgaas , Kishon Vijay Abraham I , Jingoo Han , Peter Robinson , linux-pci , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: dra7xx: add back CONFIG_PCI dependency for endpoint Message-ID: <20180118183546.GA8492@e107981-ln.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20180118131612.871559-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20180118150357.GA7544@axis.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: [...] > > However, since pci_irqd_intx_xlate is only defined inside > > CONFIG_PCI, even 489f8fe6aa71 will not help. > > > > Not completely sure about this, but perhaps a better fix is: > > > > +++ b/include/linux/pci.h > > @@ -1686,6 +1686,12 @@ static inline int pci_get_new_domain_nr(void) { return -ENOSYS; } > > #define dev_is_pf(d) (false) > > static inline bool pci_acs_enabled(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 acs_flags) > > { return false; } > > +static inline int pci_irqd_intx_xlate(struct irq_domain *d, > > + struct device_node *node, > > + const u32 *intspec, > > + unsigned int intsize, > > + unsigned long *out_hwirq, > > + unsigned int *out_type) { return 0; } > > #endif /* CONFIG_PCI */ > > > > /* Include architecture-dependent settings and functions */ > > > > > > And a 'Fixes:' tag that references 524d59f6e30a > > Looks fine to me, but I'd put the '{ return 0; }' in a new line for consistency > with the other functions here, and maybe return -EINVAL instead of > zero. > > Can you submit that as a proper patch and add my > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann You can add my: Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi too but I am a bit dubious about the Fixes: tag (it will be merged via a separate branch and I do not think we really need it), I would omit it. Please send it as soon as possible or I can do it, please let me know. Thanks, Lorenzo