[AMD Official Use Only - General]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, July 1, 2023 8:25 AM
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Quan, Evan <Evan.Quan@xxxxxxx>; rafael@xxxxxxxxxx; lenb@xxxxxxxxxx;
> Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx>; Koenig, Christian
> <Christian.Koenig@xxxxxxx>; Pan, Xinhui <Xinhui.Pan@xxxxxxx>;
> airlied@xxxxxxxxx; daniel@xxxxxxxx; johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx;
> pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; mdaenzer@xxxxxxxxxx;
> maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; tzimmermann@xxxxxxx;
> hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx; jingyuwang_vip@xxxxxxx; Lazar, Lijo
> <Lijo.Lazar@xxxxxxx>; jim.cromie@xxxxxxxxx; bellosilicio@xxxxxxxxx;
> andrealmeid@xxxxxxxxxx; trix@xxxxxxxxxx; jsg@xxxxxxxxx; arnd@xxxxxxxx;
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; amd-
> gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/9] drivers core: Add support for Wifi band RF
> mitigations
>
> > Right now there are stubs for non CONFIG_WBRF as well as other patches
> > are using #ifdef CONFIG_WBRF or having their own stubs. Like mac80211
> > patch looks for #ifdef CONFIG_WBRF.
> >
> > I think we should pick one or the other.
> >
> > Having other subsystems #ifdef CONFIG_WBRF will make the series easier
> > to land through multiple trees; so I have a slight leaning in that direction.
>
> #ifdef in C files is generally not liked because it makes build testing harder.
> There are more permutations to build. It is better to use
>
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_WBTR)) {
> }
>
> so that the code is compiled, and them throw away because
> IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_WBTR) evaluates to false.
>
> However, if the stubs are done correctly, the driver should not care. I doubt
> this is used in any sort of hot path where every instruction counts.
OK, will update as suggested.
Evan
>
> Andrew
