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

[Jan Beulich]

>>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> 16.01.09 14:58 >>>
>
>* 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.

I mostly agree here, but think that this ought to be a separate cleanup patch.

Jan

--
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/