From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Fix CONFIG_PCI=n compile failure
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:01:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1225288906.3257.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081029073629.GB17992@elte.hu>
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 08:36 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
>
> > This:
> >
> > commit fae9a0d8ca68a14da8d2351ad3e0bf42f3b29899
> > Author: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
> > Date: Tue Apr 8 13:20:56 2008 -0300
> >
> > x86: merge iommu initialization parameters
> >
> > Moved the forbid_dac parameter into pci-dma.c but forgot that it's a
> > PCI only symbol thus causing a compile failure if CONFIG_PCI=N. Fix
> > by surrounding the set clause in iommu_setup with #ifdef CONFIG_PCI
>
> uhm, that's wrong James, the above commit you refer to is half a year
> old and has been released in v2.6.26 and v2.6.27 ;-)
>
> The patch that broke the !CONFIG_PCI build in this cycle is this one:
>
> | From 5b6985ce8ec7127b4d60ad450b64ca8b82748a3b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> | From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> | Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:02:32 -0700
> | Subject: [PATCH] intel-iommu: IA64 support
> |
> | The current Intel IOMMU code assumes that both host page size and
> | Intel IOMMU page size are 4KiB. The first patch supports variable
> | page size. This provides support for IA64 which has multiple page
> | sizes.
> |
> | This patch also adds some other code hooks for IA64 platform
> | including DMAR_OPERATION_TIMEOUT definition.
> |
> | [dwmw2: some cleanup]
> | Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> | Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
> | Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
Hmm, well, the triage could be wrong ... however the prior patch seemed
to move forbid_dac out from under the PCI defines.
> > Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
> > index 1972266..47c5a7a 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c
> > @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ static __init int iommu_setup(char *p)
> > iommu_merge = 0;
> > if (!strncmp(p, "forcesac", 8))
> > iommu_sac_force = 1;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI
> > if (!strncmp(p, "allowdac", 8))
> > forbid_dac = 0;
> > if (!strncmp(p, "nodac", 5))
> > @@ -210,6 +211,7 @@ static __init int iommu_setup(char *p)
> > forbid_dac = -1;
> > return 1;
> > }
> > +#endif
>
> that's the wrong fix, the right fix from Fenghua Yu (from about a week
> ago) is at:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122480590627590&w=2
>
> and it is in the PCI tree already.
This is obviously some strange definition of the word "right" of which I
was previously unaware. That patch moves forbid_dac plus a load of
quirk processing (also for a PCI bus) out from under CONFIG_PCI only ...
which will fix the compile error, sure.
However, if you'd be so kind, please explain how a DAC (meaning Dual
Addressing Cycle on the PCI bus) is useful (or even can be effected)
without a PCI bus?
All its really doing is contaminating pci-dma.c with clutter that only
needs to be there because someone can't get the separation right.
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-29 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-28 21:22 James Bottomley
2008-10-28 22:41 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-10-29 7:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-29 14:01 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2008-10-29 14:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-29 14:18 ` James Bottomley
2008-10-29 15:13 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-30 20:13 ` [PATCH] x86 separate PCI out from DMA operations James Bottomley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1225288906.3257.4.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome