[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140422184908.GA16477@omega>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 20:49:10 +0200
From: Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>,
alex.bluesman.smirnov@...il.com, dbaryshkov@...il.com,
linux-zigbee-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
backports@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] 6lowpan: add helper to get 6lowpan namespace
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 08:45:15PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 19:58 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>
> > > > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IEEE802154_6LOWPAN)
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > +#else
> > > > > +static inline struct netns_ieee802154_lowpan *
> > > > > +net_ieee802154_lowpan(struct net *net)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + return NULL;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +#endif
> > > >
> > > > Why would that be needed? If nobody compiles 802.15.4 then it seems
> > > > nothing should reference it?
> > > >
> > > Indeed I think this is unnecessary, also.
> >
> > I wanted to be sure, and I was not. Right now 6lowpan does not depend
> > on CONFIG_NET_NS, is this intentional? I think its fine without it
> > but I was not sure.
>
> I fail to see how !CONFIG_LOWPAN is related CONFIG_NET_NS?
>
mhh, IEEE802154_6LOWPAN depends on IPV6 and I think IPV6 is related to
CONFIG_NET_NS.
- Alex
--
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