On Monday 13 October 2014 02:50:08 Alex Williamson wrote:
>
> Why wouldn't we handle this with stubs for `get_cached_msi_msg' and
> `write_msi_msg'? We're really not talking about much code that might
> get removed by the compiler with this static branch and and it seems
> like a rather non-standard mechanism. The count of MSI/X IRQs
> advertised to the user should be zero without CONFIG_MSI and later range
> checks would prevent calls to
> these functions for invalid indexes, so it's a bit of a random test in
> the code flow. Thanks,
>
That's fine with me too.
Arnd
--
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/
