Leon, The #ifdef CONFIG_X86 in cpu_supports_p2pdma() came with the AMD check.
Would it work for you if I move the includes into that single #ifdef block, next to the CPU check? Some multi-arch code does the same: https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/c7be64355fcc (drivers/acpi/mipi-disco-img.c) https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/7f3cfb7943d2 (drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.h) Thanks, Pavel > -----Original Message----- > From: Leon Romanovsky <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2026 11:40 AM > To: Popov, Pavel E <[email protected]> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]>; Logan Gunthorpe > <[email protected]>; Lukas Wunner <[email protected]>; Jim Chow > <[email protected]>; Radu Rugina <[email protected]>; > Alexey Makhalov <[email protected]>; Wei Liu > <[email protected]>; Michael Kelley <[email protected]>; Nathan > Ciobanu <[email protected]>; bcm-kernel-feedback- > [email protected]; [email protected]; linux- > [email protected]; [email protected]; linux- > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] PCI/P2PDMA: Allow P2PDMA on Intel Xeon > server CPUs > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 10:37:34AM -0700, Pavel Popov wrote: > > VMware and Hyper-V expose passthrough devices to guest VMs without an > > explicit host bridge device. Consequently, host_bridge_whitelist() > > cannot automatically identify the underlying host bridge structure, > > causing Peer-to-Peer DMA (P2PDMA) requests to be rejected unless the > > device IDs are explicitly listed in pci_p2pdma_whitelist[]. To enable > > P2PDMA on Intel hosts, this series extends cpu_supports_p2pdma(), > > which so far covers AMD Zen and newer, with an explicit list of Intel > > Xeon server generations. > > > > Patch 1 moves the CONFIG_X86 #ifdef out of cpu_supports_p2pdma(). > > Patch 2 is the v3 patch rebased on it, with Logan's Reviewed-by > > carried over; the Xeon list and the check are unchanged. > > > > Changes in v4: > > - Add 1/2, moving the CONFIG_X86 #ifdef out of cpu_supports_p2pdma() > > (Logan Gunthorpe, Leon Romanovsky) > > - Keep the #ifdef around the asm/ includes, as these headers exist > > only on x86 (Bjorn Helgaas) > > I'm confident that this is wrong usage of asm headers. > > Thanks
