Re: [PATCH v3] xen: Remove dependency between pciback and privcmd

[Chen, Jiqian]

On 2024/10/11 17:20, Chen, Jiqian wrote:
> On 2024/10/11 16:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 11.10.2024 05:42, Jiqian Chen wrote:
>>> @@ -1757,11 +1756,19 @@ static int __init xen_pcibk_init(void)
>>>  		bus_register_notifier(&pci_bus_type, &pci_stub_nb);
>>>  #endif
>>>  
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_XEN_ACPI
>>> +	xen_acpi_register_get_gsi_func(pcistub_get_gsi_from_sbdf);
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>>  	return err;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>>  static void __exit xen_pcibk_cleanup(void)
>>>  {
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_XEN_ACPI
>>> +	xen_acpi_register_get_gsi_func(NULL);
>>> +#endif
>>
>> Just wondering - instead of these two #ifdef-s, ...
>>
>>> --- a/include/xen/acpi.h
>>> +++ b/include/xen/acpi.h
>>> @@ -91,13 +91,9 @@ static inline int xen_acpi_get_gsi_info(struct pci_dev *dev,
>>>  }
>>>  #endif
>>>  
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_XEN_PCI_STUB
>>> -int pcistub_get_gsi_from_sbdf(unsigned int sbdf);
>>> -#else
>>> -static inline int pcistub_get_gsi_from_sbdf(unsigned int sbdf)
>>> -{
>>> -	return -1;
>>> -}
>>> -#endif
>>> +typedef int (*get_gsi_from_sbdf_t)(u32 sbdf);
>>> +
>>> +void xen_acpi_register_get_gsi_func(get_gsi_from_sbdf_t func);
>>> +int xen_acpi_get_gsi_from_sbdf(u32 sbdf);
>>
>> ... wouldn't a static inline stub (for the !XEN_ACPI case) aid overall readability?
> I'm not sure if other files do this. But for me, it feels a little strange to use "#ifdef CONFIG_XEN_ACPI #else" in apci.h, like self-containment.
> And "#include apci.h" in pic_stub.c is also wraped with CONFIG_XEN_ACPI.
OK, I saw other files also do this.
If you insist, I will make modifications in the next version.
Thank you!

> 
>>
>> Jan
> 

-- 
Best regards,
Jiqian Chen.