[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1401293383.22486.18.camel@x220>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 18:09:43 +0200
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] misc: atmel_pwm: only build for supported platforms
On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 17:59 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 28/05/2014 at 14:24:27 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote :
> > > > config ATMEL_PWM
> > > > tristate "Atmel AT32/AT91 PWM support"
> > > > - depends on HAVE_CLK && (AVR32 || ARCH_AT91 || COMPILE_TEST)
> > > > + depends on HAVE_CLK
> > > > + depends on AVR32 || AT91SAM9263 || AT91SAM9RL || AT91SAM9G45
> >
> > Symbols AT91SAM9263, AT91SAM9RL, and AT91SAM9G45 do not seem to exist in
> > next-20140528. Should these perhaps be SOC_AT91SAM9263, SOC_AT91SAM9RL,
> > and SOC_AT91SAM9G45 and/or ARCH_AT91SAM9263, ARCH_AT91SAM9RL, and
> > ARCH_AT91SAM9G45?
>
> I wouldn't bother too much fixing that, this will definitely be remove
> in 3.17.
Are you talking about: 1) the problem this patch tried to fix; or 2) the
problem it created?
> I was too late for 3.16 because my series was waiting on
> another patch set.
We're already too late to fix stuff for v3.16-rc1 (which will probably
only be released about three to four weeks from now)? Is that correct?
Paul Bolle
--
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