[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0ionYbXse8++6c80FXajVKYLSYD7hC5RntygKJ9+PQpYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 11:01:02 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv2 1/4] ACPI: NUMA: export pxm_to_node
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:54 AM, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 24.05.2018 10:47, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 10:33 AM, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> On 24.05.2018 10:12, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:24 PM, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>> Will be needed by paravirtualized memory devices.
>>>>
>>>> That's a little information.
>>>>
>>>> It would be good to see the entire series at least.
>>>
>>> It's part of this series (guess you only received the cover letter and
>>> this patch). Here a link to the patch using it:
>>>
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/23/803
>>
>> OK, thanks!
>>
>> It looks like you have a reason to use it in there, but please note
>> that CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA depends on CONFIG_NUMA, so you don't need to use
>> the latter directly in the #ifdef. Also wouldn't IS_ENABLED() work
>> there?
>
> Thanks for the tip on CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA. Wouldn't IS_ENABLED() require to
> have a dummy implementation of pxm_to_node() in case drivers/acpi/numa.c
> is not compiled?
Yes, it would.
But since you want export it, you can very well add one, can't you?
I'd even say that it would be prudent to do so.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists