[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 for-4.8] tools/libacpi: Fix compilation when cross building the tools
>>> On 28.11.16 at 14:37, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On 28/11/16 13:30, Jan Beulich wrote: >> However, ... >> >>> --- a/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c >>> +++ b/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c >>> @@ -17,9 +17,9 @@ >>> #include <getopt.h> >>> #include <stdlib.h> >>> #include <stdbool.h> >>> -#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) >>> +#if defined(CONFIG_X86) >>> #include <xen/hvm/hvm_info_table.h> >>> -#elif defined(__aarch64__) >>> +#elif defined(CONFIG_ARM_64) >>> #include <xen/arch-arm.h> >>> #endif >> >> .. for this and at least some of the others I wonder whether from an >> abstract pov these shouldn't be CONFIG_ARM. Agreed, it won't >> matter as long as there's no use of ACPI on ARM32, hence my R-b >> stands either way, but I'd like you to clarify whether it really should >> go in this way. > > To answer the question, I am not aware of any plan to have support for > ACPI on ARM32. Except that this wasn't the question. > Regardless the answer, this would be a separate patch as CONFIG_ARM_64 > is the correct define to match __aarch64__. Let's not mix improvement > and bug fix. Well, it looks even more suspicious to me now than it did before that both x86-32 and x86-64 are being taken care of, but only arm64. But anyway ... Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |