Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] linux-next: Tree for Oct 24 (xen)

From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 09:46:30 -0400

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:48:30AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 24.10.12 at 23:33, Randy Dunlap <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > On 10/23/2012 09:19 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > 
> > >> Hi all,
> > >> 
> > >> Changes since 201201023:
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > on x86_64:
> > > 
> > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `dbgp_reset_prep':
> > > (.text+0xb96b5): undefined reference to `xen_dbgp_reset_prep'
> > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `dbgp_external_startup':
> > > (.text+0xb9d95): undefined reference to `xen_dbgp_external_startup'
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Full randconfig file is attached.
> > 
> > So this is because with !USB_SUPPORT but EARLY_PRINTK_DBGP
> > dbgp_reset_prep() and dbgp_external_startup() get pointlessly
> > defined and exported. This got broken by the merge
> > recommendation for the ARM side changes (originally compilation
> > of drivers/xen/dbgp.c depended on just CONFIG_XEN_DOM0).
> > 
> > >From my pov, fixing the USB side would be the clean solution (i.e.
> > putting those function definitions inside a CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT
> > conditional).
> >
> > The alternative of a smaller change would be to extend the
> > conditional around the respective xen_dbgp_...() declarations
> > in include/linux/usb/ehci_def.h to become
> > 
> > #if defined(CONFIG_XEN_DOM0) && defined(CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT)
> > 
> > Please advise towards your preference.
> 
> I think that your first suggestion is the right one.

Can you guys spin up a patch pls and make sure it does not break
compilation. Thx.
> 
> 
> Otherwise we could also make drivers/xen/dbgp.c compile if
> CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK_DBGP rather than CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT.
> I think that it would create fewer maintenance pains if dbgp_reset_prep
> and dbgp_external_startup had the same compile requirements as their xen
> counterparts (aside from Xen support of course).