On Monday 23 November 2015 20:34:30 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 23 November 2015 09:25:38 Dan Williams wrote: > > > > If we had an "static inline ahci_irq_vector(int port)" helper to > > compile out the struct msix_entry de-reference would that be > > sufficient? > > Yes, that is probably a nicer way to do it. We should then also do > something like this: > > @@ -2510,7 +2513,8 @@ int ahci_host_activate(struct ata_host *host, struct scsi_host_template *sht) > int irq = hpriv->irq; > int rc; > > - if (hpriv->flags & (AHCI_HFLAG_MULTI_MSI | AHCI_HFLAG_MULTI_MSIX)) > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI_MSI) && \ > + hpriv->flags & (AHCI_HFLAG_MULTI_MSI | AHCI_HFLAG_MULTI_MSIX)) > rc = ahci_host_activate_multi_irqs(host, sht); > else if (hpriv->flags & AHCI_HFLAG_EDGE_IRQ) > rc = ata_host_activate(host, irq, ahci_single_edge_irq_intr, > > which will let gcc leave out the entire ahci_host_activate_multi_irqs() > function but still flag compile errors in it even if CONFIG_PCI is > disabled. > Dan, are you going to do the ahci_irq_vector patch, or should we use my original patch to fix up the build error? Chen-Yu Tsai just stumbled over the same problem that I noticed, and I'm sure others have run into it too. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
