Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:09:44 +0000 | From | "Jan Beulich" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86: fully honor "nolapic" (take 2) |
| |
>>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 16.01.09 14:58 >>> > >* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote: > >> >>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 16.01.09 14:42 >>> >> > >> >* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote: >> > >> >> >>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 16.01.09 13:45 >>> >> >> > >> >> >* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> + if (disable_apic) { >> >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC >> >> >> + disable_ioapic_setup(); >> >> >> +#endif >> >> >> + return; >> >> >> + } >> >> > >> >> > Shouldnt that #ifdef be avoided by always providing the function - >> >> > just it is a NOP inline in the !CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC case? >> >> >> >> That would make for a much bigger patch, since the io_apic.h doesn't >> >> (and imo shouldn't) be included without that config option. >> > >> >But we are using io-apic functionality in that file, so we should include >> >io_apic.h, right? >> >> I don't generally (i.e. when !X86_IO_APIC) think so - anything accessing >> stuff from io_apic.c is guarded by a similar #ifdef. > >and wrongly so - it proliferates ugly #ifdefs and sets us up for build >failures like that. Developers cannot be expected to keep every build >option in mind - we should provide an as homogenic and kconfig-invariant >environment as possible.
I mostly agree here, but think that this ought to be a separate cleanup patch.
Jan
| |