On Thu, 31 May 2007 16:13:38 +0100 Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 08:35:13AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Cornelia Huck wrote: > > >On Thu, 31 May 2007 06:15:57 -0600, > > >Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 02:09:22PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > >>>I split those functions out into a new file. Builds on s390 and i386. > > >>Why not just put #ifdef CONFIG_HAS_DMA / #endif around the pair of > > >>functions? I don't see the need to add a new Kconfig symbol and a new > > >>file for this. > > > > > >I prefer a new file over #ifdefs in c files. (New dma-dependent stuff > > >would also have a place where it could go to.) > > > > > >But I'll do whatever ends up as consensus :) > > > > 50 lines isn't much need for a new file. > > The scsi core shouldn't know anything about dma mappings, so a separate > file is a good idea just to keep the separation clean. ok, let's go this way. Cornelia, afaict your patch has no actual delendency upon Dan's dma-mapping-prevent-dma-dependent-code-from-linking-on.patch, correct? If so, I can merge it via James and then merge Dan's patch once James has merged. If there is a dependency then I guess I merge both into a single diff and merge it all in one hit. btw, this: diff -puN include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h~scsi-dont-build-scsi_dma_mapunmap-for-has_dma include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h --- a/include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h~scsi-dont-build-scsi_dma_mapunmap-for-has_dma +++ a/include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h @@ -135,8 +135,10 @@ extern void scsi_kunmap_atomic_sg(void * extern struct scatterlist *scsi_alloc_sgtable(struct scsi_cmnd *, gfp_t); extern void scsi_free_sgtable(struct scatterlist *, int); +#ifdef CONFIG_SCSI_DMA extern int scsi_dma_map(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd); extern void scsi_dma_unmap(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd); +#endif #define scsi_sg_count(cmd) ((cmd)->use_sg) #define scsi_sglist(cmd) ((struct scatterlist *)(cmd)->request_buffer) We don't really need the ifdefs here. If someone incorrectly calls these functions then they'll get a link-time failure anyway. The downside of removing these ifdefs is that they won't get a compile-time warning, but I tend to think that this small cost is worth it. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
