On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:27 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 01, 2018 at 08:41:35PM +0000, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> > Need stub functions in order to be able to compile ACPI without PCI
> > support.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I can't tell where this series is since I only got the pieces that
> touch PCI and the version numbers and n/n numbers don't make much
> sense then, so apologies if I'm responding to an obsolete patch.
Yes, this is an older version of the patch series for removing coupling between
ACPI and PCI.
>
> > ---
> > include/linux/pci.h | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> > index 11c71c4ecf75..15407f469d41 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> > @@ -682,10 +682,22 @@ struct pci_ops {
> > * ACPI needs to be able to access PCI config space before we've done a
> > * PCI bus scan and created pci_bus structures.
> > */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI
> > int raw_pci_read(unsigned int domain, unsigned int bus, unsigned int devfn,
> > int reg, int len, u32 *val);
> > int raw_pci_write(unsigned int domain, unsigned int bus, unsigned int devfn,
> > int reg, int len, u32 val);
> > +#else
> > +static inline int raw_pci_read(unsigned int domain, unsigned int bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int reg, int len, u32 *val)
> > +{
> > + *val = 0;
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Why do you return 0 here? If a PCI config access fails, you usually
> get ~0.
>
> > +}
> > +static inline int raw_pci_write(unsigned int domain, unsigned int bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int reg, int len, u32 val)
> > +{ return -EINVAL; }
> > +#endif
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT
> > typedef u64 pci_bus_addr_t;
> > @@ -1599,7 +1611,27 @@ pci_release_mem_regions(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > }
> >
> > #else /* CONFIG_PCI is not enabled */
> > +static inline int pci_bus_read_config_byte(struct pci_bus *bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int where, u8 *val)
> > +{ return -EINVAL; }
>
> Should these set *val as well? To ~0 (or 0) to match above, I assume?
>
> > +static inline int pci_bus_read_config_word(struct pci_bus *bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int where, u16 *val)
> > +{ return -EINVAL; }
> > +static inline int pci_bus_read_config_dword(struct pci_bus *bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int where, u32 *val)
> > +{ return -EINVAL; }
> > +static inline int pci_bus_write_config_byte(struct pci_bus *bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int where, u8 val)
> > +{ return -EINVAL; }
> > +static inline int pci_bus_write_config_word(struct pci_bus *bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int where, u16 val)
> > +{ return -EINVAL; }
> > +static inline int pci_bus_write_config_dword(struct pci_bus *bus,
> > + unsigned int devfn, int where, u32 val)
> > +{ return -EINVAL; }
> > +static inline struct pci_bus *pci_find_bus(int domain, int busnr)
> > +{ return NULL; }
> > static inline void pci_set_flags(int flags) { }
> > static inline void pci_add_flags(int flags) { }
> > static inline void pci_clear_flags(int flags) { }
> > --
> > 2.19.0
> >
