On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 2:35 AM, James Bottomley <james.bottom...@hansenpartnership.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 16:26 +0530, Sreekanth Reddy wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Joe Lawrence <joe.lawre...@stratus.com> >> wrote: >> > On 06/12/2015 05:42 AM, Sreekanth Reddy wrote: >> > ... >> >> +#if defined(alloc_ordered_workqueue) >> >> + ioc->firmware_event_thread = alloc_ordered_workqueue( >> >> + ioc->firmware_event_name, WQ_MEM_RECLAIM); >> >> +#else >> >> + ioc->firmware_event_thread = create_singlethread_workqueue( >> >> ioc->firmware_event_name); >> >> +#endif >> > >> > Hi Sreekanth, >> > >> > I think the upstream version of this code can safely assume >> > alloc_ordered_workqueue is defined, no? >> >> yes, upstream version of this code can safely assume that >> alloc_ordered_workqueue is defined. >> >> While working in-house, I observed that some of the older kernels >> doesn't defined this macro, so I have added this else section. > > The driver has to be defined for the current kernel. If you maintain a > backport, that's fine, but not in the upstream driver. The reasons are > fairly pragmatic: this code in the #else clause can't be compiled so > it's just junk to the upstream driver and the static checkers will find > it and you'll attract a flock of patches removing dead code. > Accepted. I will post next version of this patch by removing the else section.
Thanks, Sreekanth > James > > -- Regards, Sreekanth -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
