Received: by 2002:ab2:3350:0:b0:1f4:6588:b3a7 with SMTP id o16csp1398849lqe; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 07:53:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCUavxIJiZ3keC71eFiQnEHJhdjUAGIFqZl95FM7sTLuxgZtEVz7kumULX+ryWsBjchXTaFWyT2R/M8tevM87TfCjFp+jKatt11E7DhUgQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF7ApTpFFMGfHOzDv4NeNdXU9kiVG9/zrBE08OarhcJIUvIo4NLhgnDP62Z2cREGaMdDzDw X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3b89:b0:515:b93d:c885 with SMTP id g9-20020a0565123b8900b00515b93dc885mr10136221lfv.23.1712588039325; Mon, 08 Apr 2024 07:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from am.mirrors.kernel.org (am.mirrors.kernel.org. [2604:1380:4601:e00::3]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ck7-20020a170906c44700b00a463eb97691si3833321ejb.350.2024.04.08.07.53.59 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 08 Apr 2024 07:53:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-135558-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=V75jr4Yd; arc=fail (body hash mismatch); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-135558-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-135558-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by am.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FA8F1F2345E for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:53:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9875E13F425; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:53:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="V75jr4Yd" Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57AFA13F00C; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:53:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712588027; cv=none; b=GLHbrdj0LZERbRL2+XjMWgBqs5WAXcuI2NZMewDVZfs8PyBPk+8zkZL0DDYpPAH9X5U1gNkJ5MQrtUyprYc0btcX+bQ4Y0NdTHr2uwSwrLD+BgE3vWUWy22WuHlLEstCgJKKyf12ksgbl/N/cCrennhAUKMTosT9AOFNOubMMpM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712588027; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AK+lD0LkkHBN0l2USNKLGjDbz6OKeZ2Y2Lhm4uXfw0k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=DCvyE6WUVqTBGo/MEHDKn5QBNbxKV6gYzhVcve6tcGASqMJz5JcfKQc7EhgOJBmoeyL9kNqIhS39aUAsjp9uNEZOCsrE/IoCr3Ww/zdtqLBqWkHstbtC4Hx0snHmiWhyXHGK2ze2kmv7cYIH8NRRpv41VV2z3MpaVT7zQ7ERVhE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=V75jr4Yd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1712588026; x=1744124026; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=AK+lD0LkkHBN0l2USNKLGjDbz6OKeZ2Y2Lhm4uXfw0k=; b=V75jr4YdWOxsTQqjm3CN8V40KhFKp764E7IY/J6bzSJFDEDg4kBBC0gT V1WzLYl8jW2VqHwr3to3ibsoXDtcFtUbnFsy4l3NfF0f1EAH3r1Q67zEa LtUbHFkALpVpcbDWnv31Z4ZXNgAJKYQEAtuvAR3w8457r3Pn4UPP8Wf8v /KvMpbfiGB5WK28OHWJwPMDTsl1N0z9TNxjEyJrnUrTZLfVH0AWtSpT5G izr1TL/bGvLnbOcrjoSYKGQXR62mHJQ0/Um/w81p0wnDUs8inKaYhCQBF sh0w8GVchmRZc4kKBLlkCw7QxoyQ7fxJPLQJhY60aOnEPC1ECrf1VvDTf w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 0h9GVrrxRjeNonPhOSNCTA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: CE8Ar+SuR0m5aAwgQ4YAUg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11038"; a="7726140" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,187,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="7726140" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmvoesa113.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Apr 2024 07:53:46 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11038"; a="915367722" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,187,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="915367722" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Apr 2024 07:53:44 -0700 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rtqNS-00000002YTR-03sE; Mon, 08 Apr 2024 17:53:42 +0300 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 17:53:41 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ACPI: Declare acpi_blacklisted() only if CONFIG_X86 is enabled Message-ID: References: <20240407063341.3710801-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240407063341.3710801-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Sat, Apr 06, 2024 at 11:33:41PM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote: > The function acpi_blacklisted() is defined only when CONFIG_X86 is > enabled. So to keep it consistent, protect its declaration with > CONFIG_X86. .. > extern char acpi_video_backlight_string[]; > extern long acpi_is_video_device(acpi_handle handle); > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86 > extern int acpi_blacklisted(void); > +#endif > extern void acpi_osi_setup(char *str); > extern bool acpi_osi_is_win8(void); IIRC there is already similar ifdeffery, can we just move the declaration there? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko