linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (pwm tree related)

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:	Sat, 30 Jun 2012 19:20:21 +0000
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>
To:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (pwm tree related)

On Saturday 30 June 2012, Thierry Reding wrote:
> I hadn't thought about the allyesconfig case yet. Adding a "depends on
> !HAVE_PWM" to the PWM symbol should work and is the easiest fix to this
> kind of problem while other PWM legacy API implementations are ported to
> the PWM subsystem.
> 
> Sascha, Arnd (Cc'ed): what do you think?
> 
> I don't know if I'll get enough time to test this over the weekend but I
> should get to it when I'm back in the office on Monday.
> 
You cannot depend on a symbol in the same place that provides it -- that
would be a recursive dependency (or a paradox).

I think that all the drivers that are not converted to the common PWM
layer yet should depend on not enabling the common code. Once they
are all moved over, that dependency will go away.

	Arnd
--
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/