On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 03:49:57PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 02:04:41PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > Ah, right. I didn't realize that the generic pci_iomap still attempts > > > to call ioport_map(). It would probably make sense to enclose > > > the ioport_map() call in pci_iomap() inside of #ifdef CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT. > > > It's not exactly beautiful, but probably the most correct solution > > > so that we can make any call to ioport_map() a build-time error on > > > architectures that set CONFIG_NO_IOPORT. > > > > I'm not sure why do you want to do that. > > > > The problem is that any definition of ioport_map on architectures > that can't do it is potentially harmful. Calling panic() is > bad style as you pointed out, but simply returning NULL can > also be harmful because it's likely that some drivers are written > under the (false) assumption that ioport_map can never fail. > Getting a build-time error would be more helpful here IMHO. > > Arnd Yes but uglifying these users is also bad, ifdefs in code are incredibly fragile. Isn't it enough to declare ioport_map __must_check? -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
