Re: [PATCH 0/5 v3] Fix NVMe driver support on Power with 32-bit DMA
From: Nishanth Aravamudan
Date: Tue Oct 27 2015 - 21:53:10 EST
On 27.10.2015 [17:53:22 -0700], David Miller wrote:
> From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 15:20:10 -0700
> > Well, looks like I should spin up a v4 anyways for the powerpc changes.
> > So, to make sure I understand your point, should I make the generic
> > dma_get_page_shift a compile-error kind of thing? It will only fail on
> > architectures that actually build the NVME driver (as the only caller).
> > But I'm not sure how exactly to achieve that, if you could give a bit
> > more detail I'd appreciate it!
> Yes, I am basically suggesting to simply not provide a default at all.
For my own edification -- what is the way that gets resolved? I guess I
mean it seems like linux-next would cease to compile because of my new
series. Would my patches just get kicked out of -next for introducing
that (or even via the 0-day notifications), or should I put something
into the commit message indicating it is an API introduction?
Sorry for the tentativeness, I have not introduce a cross-architecture
API like this before.
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/