From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rui Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] x86/ioapic: Support hot-removal of IOAPICs present during boot Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 23:30:44 +0800 Message-ID: <1466782244-30029-1-git-send-email-rui.y.wang@intel.com> References: <20160623173445.GF17987@localhost> Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160623173445.GF17987@localhost> Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org To: helgaas@kernel.org Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, rjw@rjwysocki.net, tony.luck@intel.com, bhelgaas@google.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rui.y.wang@intel.com List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 1:35 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 01:11:41PM +0800, Rui Wang wrote: > > On Wed, June 22, 2016 11:15 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > [...] > > > > @@ -1779,8 +1780,12 @@ void __init > > > > pci_assign_unassigned_resources(void) > > > > { > > > > struct pci_bus *root_bus; > > > > > > > > - list_for_each_entry(root_bus, &pci_root_buses, node) > > > > + list_for_each_entry(root_bus, &pci_root_buses, node) { > > > > pci_assign_unassigned_root_bus_resources(root_bus); > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86 > > > > + acpi_ioapic_add(ACPI_HANDLE(root_bus->bridge)); > > > > +#endif > > > > > > Doesn't this do the right thing even if you omit the #ifdefs, since > > > you define a stub function below? > > > > > > > No. Without the '#ifdef CONFIG_X86' it breaks MIPS arch. The stub > > function is within 'ifdef CONFIG_ACPI'. On archs without ACPI it > > doesn't compile due to 'undefined reference to acpi_ioapic_add'. > > But this *could* be made to work by defining a stub for the non- > CONFIG_ACPI case. That's what we generally do to avoid ifdefs in the code. That can be done. I'll make the change and do some cross-compiling tests first. Thanks Rui