Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 07:08:24 -0700
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
       linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Fix CONFIG_PCI=n compile failure
Message-ID: <20081029070824.10c19a57@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <1225288906.3257.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1225228943.3251.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<20081029073629.GB17992@elte.hu>
	<1225288906.3257.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Organization: Intel
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1118
Lines: 27

On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:01:46 -0500
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:

> This is obviously some strange definition of the word "right" of
> which I was previously unaware.  That patch moves forbid_dac plus a
> load of quirk processing (also for a PCI bus) out from under
> CONFIG_PCI only ... which will fix the compile error, sure.
> 
> However, if you'd be so kind, please explain how a DAC (meaning Dual
> Addressing Cycle on the PCI bus) is useful (or even can be effected)
> without a PCI bus?
> 
> All its really doing is contaminating pci-dma.c with clutter that only
> needs to be there because someone can't get the separation right.o
>

why do you even want that file for CONFIG_PCI=n ??

-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/