On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 06:08:49PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On 01/09/14 17:58, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2014 at 05:53:33PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > >> Confused. Then how come smsc911x_drv_probe() has this line: > > > >> acpi_handle *ahandle = ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev); > > > >> without any #ifdef's. > > > > There's a stub smsc911x_probe_config_acpi() provided in the non-ACPI > > case, Arnd's suggestion is basically to remove the stub. > > > > I think Catalin is referring to ACPI_HANDLE used without any #ifdefs > > Catalin, few macros like ACPI_HANDLE and ACPI_PTR are defined in > include/linux/acpi.h even when CONFIG_ACPI is not set mainly to > avoid #ifdef's around simple assignments like the above one and one > in platform_driver.acpi_match_table My comment was to Graeme who said that #ifdef's were needed because acpi_handle (lowercase) was not defined in the !CONFIG_ACPI case. However, further down in the patch it was used without any #ifdef's. -- Catalin -- 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
