On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 12:54:20PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 02.10.12 at 13:45, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Considering that dbgp doesn't seem to be very useful without PCI at the > >> > moment, could we just turn it into: > >> > > >> > dom0-$(CONFIG_PCI) += dbgp.o > >> > > >> > ? > >> > >> Better not - the code is specifically not PCI-only. And I can't see > >> how it would be harmful to be compiled on e.g. ARM (so the > >> merge perhaps really should use XEN_DOM0 alone, without > >> X86. If anything (and that may indeed be a minor oversight of > >> the original patch) one might want it to depend on USB_SUPPORT, > >> as without that no in-tree debug port capable driver would be > >> able to load (and hence interfere with Xen's use of the debug > >> port). However, as long as it builds fine with USB_SUPPORT > >> undefined (which I believe it does), having it in the shape it > >> is allows for out-of-tree drivers as well (as long as they make > >> use of the designated interface). > > > > OK for PCI. > > Regarding USB_SUPPORT, considering that gbgp.c calls hcd_to_bus, I think > > it would make sense to make it depend on it. > > As said - I'd prefer to do that only if indeed needed to get things > to build without that option. Since include/usb/* doesn't reference > CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT, I'm in favor of supporting at least those > eventual out-of-tree drivers that do use the pre-existing data > structures (and others shouldn't be calling pre-existing APIs > anyway). But I wouldn't NAK a patch doing what you suggest > either. Could it depend on EARLY_PRINTK_DBGP ? > > Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
