On 24.09.2024 12:16, [email protected] wrote: > On Mon, 2024-09-23 at 16:43 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 17.09.2024 18:15, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: >>> --- a/xen/common/Kconfig >>> +++ b/xen/common/Kconfig >>> @@ -12,6 +12,14 @@ config CORE_PARKING >>> bool >>> depends on NR_CPUS > 1 >>> >>> +config DEVICE_INIT >>> + bool >>> + default !X86 >> >> This can simply be "def_bool y" as ... >> >>> + depends on !X86 && (ACPI || HAS_DEVICE_TREE) >> >> ... this enforces all restrictions. As indicated before I'd prefer if >> we >> could get away without yet another Kconfig constant, which would then >> also eliminate my concern about the expression not really covering >> for >> the case where x86 would obtain DT support (and hence likely needing >> the >> initialization here, too). What about ... >> >>> --- a/xen/common/Makefile >>> +++ b/xen/common/Makefile >>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_HYPFS_CONFIG) += config_data.o >>> obj-$(CONFIG_CORE_PARKING) += core_parking.o >>> obj-y += cpu.o >>> obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_TRACE) += debugtrace.o >>> +obj-$(CONFIG_DEVICE_INIT) += device.o >> >> obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_DEVICE_TREE) += device.o >> obj-$(filter-out $(CONFIG_X86),$(CONFIG_ACPI)) += device.o >> >> ? (Eventually we could then simplify this to just obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI), >> to allow DT on x86, making sure the ACPI part of the file builds for >> x86 but does nothing there.) > I am okay with this solution. It seems I misunderstood you in the first > version of this patch series. When "obj-$(or ... )" was used, I decided > it wasn’t a good approach to use 'or', 'filter-out', or other similar > functions in Makefiles for such cases. I couldn't come up with a better > solution at the time, so I introduced a new config instead. > > The only issue I see with this approach is that in device.c, there is > the following code: > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > > extern const struct acpi_device_desc _asdevice[], _aedevice[]; > > int __init acpi_device_init(enum device_class class, const void *data, > int class_type) > ... > > #endif > This shouldn't be compiled for X86. However, it will still be compiled > if we simplify to: > obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_DEVICE_TREE) += device.o > obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI) += device.o
Which is why I said "eventually". For now it'll be the $(filter-out ...). How to best adjust the code to permit above simplification is to be determined; what you outlined matches what I had thought of as an option. Jan
