[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFr9PXmVQFDdMiMUgg4v7DAcFkdaUtFeaXOyW4_NrVd5oYKSSA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2021 09:16:24 +0900
From: Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: 8250_dw: Mark acpi match table as maybe unused
Hi Andy,
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021 at 06:04, Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > Doesn't this mean the ACPI table ends up in kernels that will never use ACPI?
>
> Yes. Is it a problem (*)? If so, you need to use ifdeffery, since __maybe_unused is
> not for the ID tables.
Ok, is there a reason it's not for the ID tables? Does it break something?
> *) while justifying this you also need to show why it's a problem specific
> to the ACPI IDs and not a problem for OF ones, which we have tons of in the
> Linux kernel without any guards (ifdeffery).
To be honest I don't care about this too much. I just wanted to cut
down some of the noise when I build my patch backlog so that warnings
in the stuff I'm trying to mainline are more visible.
For what it's worth I think the OF ids are a bit wasteful. For some
drivers where there are tons of broken variations they add a few K of
unneeded data. But since everyone now has gigabytes of memory I doubt
they care...
I'm working with 64MB. :)
Cheers,
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists