On 05/18/2018 08:20 AM, Gary R Hook wrote:
> On 05/15/2018 08:46 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 03:00:50PM -0500, Gary R Hook wrote:
>>> This was brought up a few weeks ago in, I believe, version 3 of this patch.
>>> That question was discussed (because that's what I did the first time out),
>>> and _someone_ _else_ asked about why I didn't just do it the way I've done
>>> it here.
>>
>> You don't have this problem if you put the code in amd_iommu.c in an
>> IOMMU_DEBUGFS ifdef.
>
> Of course. My preference, however, is a separate file to avoid size creep.
> That's why I've done it this way.
>
> To whit: there have been threads discussing the advisability/acceptability of
> using #ifdefs for debug code. My take-away was to avoid them. Perhaps I
> misunderstood.
>
> So: I don't understand your comment. Is this an observation, or is it an
> imperative statement? I'd like for a maintainer to clearly indicate what is
> acceptable, and I'll do it.
>
>
Hi,
I looked back at Robin Murphy's comments on April 17:
<quote>
Well, you could do a makefile-level dependency i.e.:
ifeq ($(CONFIG_IOMMU_DEBUG), y)
obj-$(CONFIG_AMD_IOMMU) += amd_iommu_debugfs.o
obj-$(CONFIG_BLAH_IOMMU) += blah_iommu_debugfs.o
...
endif
Or alternatively have an intermediate silent Kconfig option:
config AMD_IOMMU_DEBUG
def_bool y
depends on AMD_IOMMU && IOMMU_DEBUG
The makefile option is arguably ugly, but does at least scale better ;)
</quote>
I think the Kconfig option would have been the correct choice.
--
~Randy
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
