lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [ACPI] [PATCH] Updated patches for PCI IRQ resource deallocation support [2/3]
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Kenji Kaneshige wrote:

> I'm trying to update my patch based on the feedback from you. Updated
> patch defines acpi_unregister_gsi() in both include/asm-i386/acpi.h
> and include/asm-ia64/acpi.h. But now I'm having one concern about it.
>
> Some arch specific functions would be called from acpi_unregister_gsi()
> when it is implemented. But include/asm-xxx/acpi.h is included before
> many other header files, so many 'implicit declaration of function xxx'
> warning message would be appeared. These warning messages are disappeared
> if we declare all functions called by acpi_unregister_gsi() also in
> include/asm-xxx/acpi.h. But I don't like this approach very much.
>
> After all, now I think it is better not to define acpi_unregister_gsi()
> in header files.

Ok i think i may have not conveyed my meaning properly, my mistake. What i
think would be better is if the architectures which have no-op
acpi_unregister_gsi to declare them as static inline in header files. For
architectures (such as ia64) which have a functional acpi_unregister_gsi,
we can declare them in a .c file with the proper exports etc.

Thanks Kenji and sorry for the confusion.
Zwane

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.101 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site