> -----Original Message----- > From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 2:11 PM > To: Pascal Van Leeuwen <pvanleeuwen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@xxxxxxxxxx>; antoine.tenart@xxxxxxxxxxx; > herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; pvanleeuwen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 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 > <pvanleeuwen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: linux-crypto-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <linux-crypto-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On > Behalf Of > > > YueHaibing > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 3:45 AM > > > To: antoine.tenart@xxxxxxxxxxx; herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > pvanleeuwen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Cc: linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; YueHaibing > > > <yuehaibing@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > 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. > 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. 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. > > > > Fixes: 625f269a5a7a ("crypto: inside-secure - add support for PCI based FPGA > development > > > board") > > > Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > 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