From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarkko Nikula Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCHv3 1/3] ACPI: Provide struct acpi_device stub for !CONFIG_ACPI builds Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:14:17 +0200 Message-ID: <5284B089.1020209@linux.intel.com> References: <1383309356-25430-1-git-send-email-jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> <1384419661-28293-1-git-send-email-jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> <1384419661-28293-2-git-send-email-jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Mark Brown , Wolfram Sang , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org To: Takashi Iwai Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org On 11/14/2013 12:03 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote: > At Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:00:59 +0200, > Jarkko Nikula wrote: >> We have a few cases where we want to access struct device dev field in >> struct acpi_device from generic code that is build also without CONFIG_ACPI. >> >> Provide here a minimal struct acpi_device stub that allows to build such a >> code without adding new #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI churn. This should not increase >> section sizes if code is protected by ACPI_COMPANION() runtime checks as >> those will be optimized out by later compiler stages in case CONFIG_ACPI is >> not set. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Nikula >> --- >> Rafael, instead of this we could also have an accessor but adev->dev looked >> better in actual code and size vmlinux didn't change for x86_64_defconfig >> with CONFIG_ACPI is not set nor for omap2plus_defconfig. > This looks too hackish, IMO. Defining a different dummy struct often > gives more headaches. Thinking of the potential risk by misuses, it'd > be simpler and safer to define a macro like acpi_dev_name() instead. > > BTW, is linux/device.h already included in !CONFIG_ACPI case? > It is included unconditionally in include/linux/acpi.h. Your acpi_dev_name() proposal may be good enough for now as adev->dev access in generic code (now under CONFIG_ACPI) seems to be anyway around dev_name, using only pointer to struct acpi_device or has more things that prevents immediate #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI removal there. But one problem at time. I'll cook a version with acpi_dev_name. -- Jarkko