[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080420.024704.02026708.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 02:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: ivdoorn@...il.com
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, linville@...driver.com, tomas.winkler@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
mabbas@...ux.intel.com, ischram@...enet.be, rjw@...k.pl
Subject: Re: [build bug] drivers/built-in.o: In function
`rt2x00leds_resume': : undefined reference to `led_classdev_resume'
From: Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@...il.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:31:00 +0200
> Not sure about it, but doesn't LEDS_CLASS depend on NEW_LEDS ?
> Which would make selecting LEDS_CLASS broken when NEW_LEDS isn't enabled?
True, what an awful dependency chain.
NEW_LEDS requires HAS_IOMEM. This is to handle platforms like
S390 and UM.
But I think this protection is overboard. Specific drivers
might need IOMEM functionality, but the basic infrastructure
does not.
All of the core infrastrucure and generic LEDS facilities, including
NEW_LEDS, LEDS_CLASS, and LEDS_TRIGGERS, don't need the IOMEM
protection.
And neither do the LED device drivers, they already each have a
depenency for a specific platform.
You could even imagine a hypervisor based LED driver that a platform
like S390, which does not enable HAS_IOMEM, might want to support
under this infrastructure.
I think NEW_LEDS can be completely eliminated.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists