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]

Message-Id: <20120703154318.9e32d4a490c0b32e7d955ca4@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:43:18 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
	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)

Hi all,

On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 08:56:39 +0200 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de> wrote:
>
> But if we make the new PWM symbol conflict with HAVE_PWM, then it'll do
> the right thing for any of the legacy PWM implementations, without
> having to track them down. Furthermore it'll also keep the legacy
> version by default and not allow the generic one to be enabled in that
> case. This is more likely to cause less side-effects than the other way
> around.
> 
> > One question though: if the generic pwm implementation does not set
> > HAVE_PWM, how can a driver check its presence?
> 
> The driver depends on PWM. HAVE_PWM is the symbol for the legacy
> implementations, while PWM is the new PWM API symbol.

I am still getting the mutliple definition errors from my powerpc
allyesconfg build.

$ grep PWM .config
CONFIG_TWL6030_PWM=y
CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_PWM=y
CONFIG_PWM=y

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped