Re: 2.6.20-rc4-mm1: PCI=n: drivers/net/3c59x.c compile error

[Sergei Shtylyov]

Hello.

Greg KH wrote:

> > > > > > > 3x59x-fix-pci-resource-management.patch causes the following compile 
> > > > > > > error with CONFIG_PCI=n:

> > > > > > > <--  snip  -->

> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > >  CC      drivers/net/3c59x.o
> > > > > > > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/linux-2.6.20-rc4-mm1/drivers/net/3c59x.c: 
> > > > > > > In function 'vortex_init_one':
> > > > > > > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/linux-2.6.20-rc4-mm1/drivers/net/3c59x.c:961: 
> > > > > > > error: implicit declaration of function 'pci_request_regions'
> > > > > > > /home/bunk/linux/kernel-2.6/linux-2.6.20-rc4-mm1/drivers/net/3c59x.c:985: 
> > > > > > > error: implicit declaration of function 'pci_release_regions'
> > > > > > > make[3]: *** [drivers/net/3c59x.o] Error 1

> > > > > >   Grr, at at the same time it's happy with pci_enable_device().
> > > > > >   I'd say the problem is in <linux/pci.h>,  not in the patch.

> > > > >   Has there been any patch to fix the "unbalanced" 
> > > > > pci_{request|release}_regions() declarations? Am I suposed to create 
> > > > > such?

> > > >   Alternatively, vortex_{init|remove_one() and struct pci_driver there 
> > > > could have been put under #ifdef CONFIG_PCI (good idea anyway -- should 
> > > > reduce driver size on non-PCI systems)...

> > >    I wonder if I may count on any feedback on this -- asking linux-pci now...
> > >    The issue is as follows: with my patch pci_{request|release}_regions() may 
> > > be called with CONFIG_PCI=n (probably, this never has been a issue before) but 
> > > <linux/pci.h> don't have them declared in this case -- unlike 
> > > pci_enable_device() which is just empty for CONFIG_PCI=n.
> > >    Now, what kind of approach do I take:

> > > - a "fair one", so that pci_{request|release}_regions() get "balanced"
> > >   declarations in the header like pci_enable_device();

> > > - a "local one" (and even saving non-PCI kernel from needless bloat), i.e.
> > >   #ifdef out functions that are only meaningful with CONFIG_PCI=y)?

> > >    I'm leaning to the second now...

> > I'd prefer the fair one -- add stubs to include/linux/pci.h.

> Me too, please just send me a patch adding them to pci.h so you don't
> have to have #ifdefs in your .c code.

   Erm, before I do that, could somebody explain what

#define HAVE_PCI_REQ_REGIONS 2

accompanying their declaration is for? I have't found any references to it in 
the source. Should I duplicate it for CONFIG_PCI=n case (I guess not)?

> thanks,

> greg k-h

WBR, Sergei
-
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/