Re: [PATCH] x86: fully honor "nolapic" (take 2)

[Ingo Molnar]

* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> 16.01.09 14:42 >>>
> >
> >* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> >>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> 16.01.09 13:45 >>>
> >> >
> >> >* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> 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.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/