linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PATCH] STAGING pull for .40

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 23 May 2011 13:43:13 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...uxdriverproject.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] STAGING pull for .40

On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> Here is the big pull request for the staging tree for your .40 tree (or
> 2.8.0, whatever you are wanting to rename it to.)

Hmm. Doing my once-a-release "try to compile everything in staging
after pulling from greg by using allyesconfig and also forcing all
staging", I get this:

  drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/built-in.o:(.data+0xba0):
multiple definition of `wl_msg_level'
  drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmfmac/built-in.o:(.data+0x1a94): first
defined here

which looks like another case of "can't compile two things both into
the kernel".

Looks like the BRCMSMAC / BRCMFMAC drivers need to be mutually
exclusive. Something like

  depends on m || (BRCMSMAC != y)

for BRCMFMAC?

Or they should just avoid using the same globally visible name.

I dunno.

                                Linus
--
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/