[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E948FC3.2080801@xenotime.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:49:39 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 11 (mmc)
On 10/11/11 02:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The linux-next tree is now available from
> git://github.com/sfrothwell/linux-next.git as a temporary measure while
> the kernel.org servers are unavailable.
>
> It may also turn up on git.kernel.org (depending on the mirroring). The
> patch set is still absent, however.
>
> Changes since 20111007:
When CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled:
In file included from next-2011-1011/drivers/mmc/card/sdio_uart.c:43:0:
next-2011-1011/include/linux/mmc/card.h:175:12: error: 'DISK_NAME_LEN' undeclared here (not in a function)
Deleting the #include <linux/mmc/card.h> fixes the sdio_uart.c build.
However, the same problem occurs in mmc/core/core.c:
In file included from next-2011-1011/drivers/mmc/core/core.c:30:0:
next-2011-1011/include/linux/mmc/card.h:175:12: error: 'DISK_NAME_LEN' undeclared here (not in a function)
Should mmc/core/ depend on BLOCK? or should it just be made
to build even when BLOCK is not enabled?
--
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
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