On 11/14/2013 12:03 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:00:59 +0200,
Jarkko Nikula wrote:
We have a few cases where we want to access struct device dev field in
struct acpi_device from generic code that is build also without CONFIG_ACPI.
Provide here a minimal struct acpi_device stub that allows to build such a
code without adding new #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI churn. This should not increase
section sizes if code is protected by ACPI_COMPANION() runtime checks as
those will be optimized out by later compiler stages in case CONFIG_ACPI is
not set.
Signed-off-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Rafael, instead of this we could also have an accessor but adev->dev looked
better in actual code and size vmlinux didn't change for x86_64_defconfig
with CONFIG_ACPI is not set nor for omap2plus_defconfig.
This looks too hackish, IMO. Defining a different dummy struct often
gives more headaches. Thinking of the potential risk by misuses, it'd
be simpler and safer to define a macro like acpi_dev_name() instead.
BTW, is linux/device.h already included in !CONFIG_ACPI case?
It is included unconditionally in include/linux/acpi.h.
Your acpi_dev_name() proposal may be good enough for now as adev->dev
access in generic code (now under CONFIG_ACPI) seems to be anyway around
dev_name, using only pointer to struct acpi_device or has more things
that prevents immediate #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI removal there.
But one problem at time. I'll cook a version with acpi_dev_name.
--
Jarkko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
