From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Fix compilation for !CONFIG_ACPI
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 12:36:01 -0700
Message-ID: <b95b247b5dd85b0839a9fa6167fd1682578fb92b.camel@linux.intel.com>
References: <20181023185429.GA6756@light.dominikbrodowski.net>
         <e8e018e267434cabc2b8db434a3576c082ab3fff.camel@linux.intel.com>
         <20181023193405.pxfl4vyazt7rtc3x@isilmar-4.linta.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20181023193405.pxfl4vyazt7rtc3x@isilmar-4.linta.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2018-10-23 at 21:34 +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 12:17:28PM -0700, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> > On Tue, 2018-10-23 at 20:54 +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> > > Fixes: 86d333a8cc7f ("cpufreq: intel_pstate: Add base_frequency
> > > attribute")
> > 
> > Thanks for the fix.
> > 
> > > Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
> > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> > > b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> > > index 49c0abf2d48f..50c5699970c5 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
> > > @@ -390,11 +390,6 @@ static int
> > > intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(int
> > > cpu)
> > >  static void intel_pstate_set_itmt_prio(int cpu)
> > >  {
> > >  }
> > > -
> > > -static int intel_pstate_get_cppc_guranteed(int cpu)
> > > -{
> > > -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> > > -}
> > 
> > What is ACPI is defined but SCHED_MC_PRIO is not defined?
> > Based on
> > "select ACPI_CPPC_LIB if X86_64 && ACPI && SCHED_MC_PRIO"
> > 
> > So the above is still required. correct?
> 
> Seems so, yes. Though that leads to either complicated #ifdefs or
> code
> duplications.
> 
> In any case, I'd suggest marking at least nested #else and #endif
> lines
> with comments denoting which #ifdef they relate to, e.g.
> 
> 	#else	/* CONFIG_ACPI */
> 	#endif	/* CONFIG_ACPI */
Will you submit a change?

Thanks,
Srinivas

> 
> Thanks,
> 	Dominik