Re: [ACPI] [PATCH] Updated patches for PCI IRQ resource deallocation support [2/3]

[Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
> 
>> > > Why not just make these static inlines in header files? Since you're on
>> > > this, how about making irq_desc and friends dynamic too?
>> 
>> I'm not quite sure what you are saying, but my idea is defining
>> acpi_unregister_gsi() as a opposite part of acpi_register_gsi().
>> Acpi_register_gsi() is defined for each arch (i386, ia64), so
>> acpi_unregister_gsi() is defined for each i386 and ia64 too. 
> 
> Well i meant can't you define them in a header file as follows;
> 
> static void inline acpi_unregister_gsi (unsigned int irq)
> {
> }
> 
> An advantage is that it saves memory since you don't also have to create 
> the extra data objects for the exported symbol. But really you don't have 
> to export something which does nothing.
> 
Hi Zwane,

I understand what you mean. It looks good to me.
I'll update my patch.

Thanks,
Kenji Kaneshige