[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1414746397.1964.13.camel@x220>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:06:37 +0100
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>,
Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Intel Linux Wireless <ilw@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: iwlwifi: mvm: BACKPORT_WANT_DEV_COREDUMP?
On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 09:45 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 09:40 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > Your commit aadede6e9f4c ("iwlwifi: mvm: port to devcoredump framework")
> > landed in today's linux-next (next-20141031). It adds a select statement
> > for BACKPORT_WANT_DEV_COREDUMP. There's no Kconfig symbol
> > BACKPORT_WANT_DEV_COREDUMP so this select is currently a nop. (In
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/30/578 I proposed a patch that emits a
> > warning in cases like this.)
> >
> > Did you perhaps meant to select WANT_DEV_COREDUMP?
>
> Yes. We'll fix it up in the iwlwifi tree.
>
> Thanks for the report!
Perhaps you could also look into somehow guarding the call of
dev_coredumpm(), that this commit added, with checks for
CONFIG_DEV_COREDUMP. See, I had a quick look at all this and selecting
WANT_DEV_COREDUMP might not be enough, because DISABLE_DEV_COREDUMP can
still, well, disable DEV_COREDUMP. Or am I misreading the Kconfig
symbols that regulate DEV_COREDUMP?
Thanks,
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