[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <348baf8d-b42f-13a7-3398-cb0268d7c693@deltatee.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 12:53:40 -0600
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
uml-devel <user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] um: add dummy ioremap and iounmap functions
Any thoughts on this? My patches for the other architectures are already
in linux-next. um is the only one that remains.
Thanks,
Logan
On 27/05/17 12:15 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 27/05/17 12:08 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Still, those code patch could be protected by #ifdef CONFIG_HAS_IOMEM,
>> or better, if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAS_IOMEM)).
>
> Well I think it would have to be the former seeing the latter would
> still end up trying to compile the missing function. But having ifdefs
> inside code is not generally seen as good idea[1].
>
> I'd really like to go forward with either this patch or something like
> it. The other two arches that have this problem are fine with merging a
> fix and adding ifdefs to work around a single arch doesn't feel right to me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Logan
>
> [1] http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/ifdefs.html
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists