[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1320673476.14409.367.camel@x61.thuisdomein>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 14:44:36 +0100
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To: Jiri Kosina <trivial@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org
Subject: [PATCH] [TRIVIAL] 8250_hp300: Fix warning typo 'CONFIG_8250'
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
---
0) This patch is untested: I have neither the hardware nor the toolchain
needed. It should be correct (though it makes an already too long line
even longer). Nevertheless I think a proper solution is a patch that
drops this warning entirely. I've CC'd the m68k people for further
feedback.
1) If SERIAL_8250_HP300 is set but neither HPDCA nor HPAPCI are set we
end up with an elaborate nop, don't we? Initialization should always
fail in that case. So effectively SERIAL_8250_HP300 depends on HPDCA
and/or HPAPCI. Was there perhaps some problem in translating that
dependency into a Kconfig dependency?
2) Related question: is it useful to have both HPDCA and HPAPCI set?
drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c
index c13438c..dc41fbb 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
#include "8250.h"
#if !defined(CONFIG_HPDCA) && !defined(CONFIG_HPAPCI)
-#warning CONFIG_8250 defined but neither CONFIG_HPDCA nor CONFIG_HPAPCI defined, are you sure?
+#warning CONFIG_SERIAL_8250 defined but neither CONFIG_HPDCA nor CONFIG_HPAPCI defined, are you sure?
#endif
#ifdef CONFIG_HPAPCI
--
1.7.4.4
--
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