[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54CD1203.6010400@roeck-us.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 09:33:55 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: libahci: Use of_platform_device_create only if supported
On 01/31/2015 09:08 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 08:53:36AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> I agree, it is weird, as is the whole "all API functions associated
>> with OF_ADDRESS are handled differently on sparc" thing. But that
>> is neither new nor something I can fix.
>
> Out of curiousity, why isn't the header file doing the following?
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_OF_ADDRESS
>
> void of_platform_device_create(blah);
> ...
>
> #else
>
> static inline void of_platform_device_create(blah)
> {
> }
>
> #endif
>
Maybe it is to ensure that the callers realize that the code won't
always work as intended, but I don't really know. It is kind of annoying,
though, since the resulting compile errors show up on a regular basis.
Mostly they are resolved by disabling the affected code for sparc,
but obviously that won't work here.
AFAIK this only affects sparc, all other architectures support OF_ADDRESS.
There was some discussion to get rid of OF_ADDRESS at some point,
so there is hope that this will get resolved. Until then all we can do
is to put in bandages.
Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists