From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F285C3A5A8 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 12:27:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D81020820 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 12:27:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="Yaru825M" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729934AbfIDM1f (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2019 08:27:35 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com ([209.85.128.65]:39702 "EHLO mail-wm1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725938AbfIDM1e (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2019 08:27:34 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id q12so1699343wmj.4 for ; Wed, 04 Sep 2019 05:27:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6NZ96D9puEHxfzquVc6He7xf5nQpmZ8JSWavhp3HobU=; b=Yaru825MEoJOrDpdYOPMTkVcccBcPenEdQ38DAGjE1qc4fRskhwLtC4sJyTty778D5 Uva/akBI4ltEngcEiL8vK8QLEMSP8DStf2kuaEYfuxb59YZzk6I+it15TzFgudqSIvm/ JYpzqxdJcD9EL+6GNXO/cyWhsQ14m8hncM7bmi+RTx5+S797gfEX5t2+OzH4n+ct+r/z 6FZ/weoORBRjeNqBDdaPoxQkdkoxGF8yahuvLAse5qJrS6lwTsTBOhtBCaZdOqn9veCO MQ+IroPD1KkuKJJH2ArS+/EAJfr5baX4eVXajylVTqGhD5eDTRm0JuGROl9JrnJVlMfb b0iQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6NZ96D9puEHxfzquVc6He7xf5nQpmZ8JSWavhp3HobU=; b=LO3MnhnvsL2KBRl4JqwTS+R9Layy1Q0CQcsIqQfXgD2H0lo9WGtcJvu2ihqF1wHpOp bPVAMNlALb84+u7mUFhxbW8jqzbeqymnPol5vTj9506DcQTYj1lFov5yPSUYSeUrLYqN wMy1BhL2uxL4XWCqKMtuo6vtbmMq/zKqInWipMHX5LvziSY4s7K4hjSZ4e4bNesh1w7/ x4cx56rFxzUx8X+w7a/ytWglQeR/Nq1e6OaJF/90CdZmI2Cok4xp7/9ksjH8JaJZ62MC k4+jYzpEW1fY4TJvrHrmutNWieioRhjRZUNZqhcX056pVDABnmRwZiPFWuVsGJTj+qKV JXxg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVq4vuT9/s1PArI4sarKRwIes1NCn+umIDPThV8oLjDOWPo6izO 8LClvLGkIDevhoAzxkgDutVC3NCiSgiwYlnA21e8YA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzGSenGL1fOlhaP3eM0Wsxh9RQpnRMxJXsQ9c/jnvFT1eATCwySYBcKoufjBaezNjWYU7RdZ9CpNR/9m9WlHbc= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2546:: with SMTP id l67mr4370373wml.10.1567600051587; Wed, 04 Sep 2019 05:27:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190902141910.1080-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com> <20190903014518.20880-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 05:27:19 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 -next] crypto: inside-secure - Fix build error without CONFIG_PCI To: Pascal Van Leeuwen Cc: YueHaibing , "antoine.tenart@bootlin.com" , "herbert@gondor.apana.org.au" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "pvanleeuwen@insidesecure.com" , "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 05:25, Pascal Van Leeuwen wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ard Biesheuvel > > Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 2:11 PM > > To: Pascal Van Leeuwen > > Cc: YueHaibing ; antoine.tenart@bootlin.com; > > herbert@gondor.apana.org.au; davem@davemloft.net; pvanleeuwen@insidesecure.com; linux- > > crypto@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 -next] crypto: inside-secure - Fix build error without CONFIG_PCI > > > > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 04:57, Pascal Van Leeuwen > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org On > > Behalf Of > > > > YueHaibing > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 3:45 AM > > > > To: antoine.tenart@bootlin.com; herbert@gondor.apana.org.au; davem@davemloft.net; > > > > pvanleeuwen@insidesecure.com > > > > Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; YueHaibing > > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH v2 -next] crypto: inside-secure - Fix build error without CONFIG_PCI > > > > > > > > If CONFIG_PCI is not set, building fails: > > > > > > > > rivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel.c: In function safexcel_request_ring_irq: > > > > drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel.c:944:9: error: implicit declaration of function > > > > pci_irq_vector; > > > > did you mean rcu_irq_enter? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > irq = pci_irq_vector(pci_pdev, irqid); > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > Use #ifdef block to guard this. > > > > > > > Actually, this is interesting. My *original* implementation was using > > > straight #ifdefs, but then I got review feedback stating that I should not > > > do that, as it's not compile testable, suggesting to use regular C if's > > > instead. Then there was quite some back-and-forth on the actual > > > implementation and I ended up with this. > > > > > > So now it turns out that doesn't work and I'm suggested to go full-circle > > > back to straight #ifdef's? Or is there some other way to make this work? > > > Because I don't know where to go from here ... > > > > > > > > > C conditionals are preferred over preprocessor conditional, but if the > > conditional code refers to symbols that are not declared when the > > Kconfig symbol is not defined, preprocessor conditionals are the only > > option. > > > Sure, I get that. But I *had* the #ifdef's and then other people told me > to get rid of them. How is one supposed to know when which symbols are > declared exactly? Moreover, I feel that if #ifdef's are sometimes the > only way, then you should be careful providing feedback on the subject. > If you compile your code with and without the Kconfig symbol defined, the compiler will tell you if there is a problem or not. > > This is the reason we have so many empty static inline functions in > > header files - it ensures that the symbols are declared even if the > > only invocations are from dead code. > > > This ties back into my previous question: how am I supposed to know whether > stuff is nicely covered by these empty static inlines or not? If this > happens to be a hit-and-miss affair. > Indeed. > Note that I tested the code with the 2 platforms at my disposal - actually > the only 2 relevant platforms for this driver, if you ask me - and they > both compiled just fine, so I had no way of finding this "problem" myself. > Did you try disabling CONFIG_PCI? > > > > > > Fixes: 625f269a5a7a ("crypto: inside-secure - add support for PCI based FPGA > > development > > > > board") > > > > Signed-off-by: YueHaibing > > > > --- > > > > v2: use 'ifdef' instead of 'IS_ENABLED' > > > > --- > > > > drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel.c | 13 ++++++++++--- > > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel.c b/drivers/crypto/inside- > > > > secure/safexcel.c > > > > index e12a2a3..5253900 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/crypto/inside-secure/safexcel.c > > > > @@ -937,7 +937,8 @@ static int safexcel_request_ring_irq(void *pdev, int irqid, > > > > int ret, irq; > > > > struct device *dev; > > > > > > > > - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI) && is_pci_dev) { > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI > > > > + if (is_pci_dev) { > > > > struct pci_dev *pci_pdev = pdev; > > > > > > > > dev = &pci_pdev->dev; > > > > @@ -947,7 +948,10 @@ static int safexcel_request_ring_irq(void *pdev, int irqid, > > > > irqid, irq); > > > > return irq; > > > > } > > > > - } else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) { > > > > + } else > > > > +#endif > > > > + { > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF > > > > struct platform_device *plf_pdev = pdev; > > > > char irq_name[6] = {0}; /* "ringX\0" */ > > > > > > > > @@ -960,6 +964,7 @@ static int safexcel_request_ring_irq(void *pdev, int irqid, > > > > irq_name, irq); > > > > return irq; > > > > } > > > > +#endif > > > > } > > > > > > > > ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, irq, handler, > > > > @@ -1137,7 +1142,8 @@ static int safexcel_probe_generic(void *pdev, > > > > > > > > safexcel_configure(priv); > > > > > > > > - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI) && priv->version == EIP197_DEVBRD) { > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI > > > > + if (priv->version == EIP197_DEVBRD) { > > > > /* > > > > * Request MSI vectors for global + 1 per ring - > > > > * or just 1 for older dev images > > > > @@ -1153,6 +1159,7 @@ static int safexcel_probe_generic(void *pdev, > > > > return ret; > > > > } > > > > } > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > /* Register the ring IRQ handlers and configure the rings */ > > > > priv->ring = devm_kcalloc(dev, priv->config.rings, > > > > -- > > > > 2.7.4 > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Pascal van Leeuwen > > > Silicon IP Architect, Multi-Protocol Engines @ Verimatrix > > > www.insidesecure.com > > Regards, > Pascal van Leeuwen > Silicon IP Architect, Multi-Protocol Engines @ Verimatrix > www.insidesecure.com >