[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180719152940.0720e9c1@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:29:40 +1000
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the net-next tree
Hi Guenter,
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 20:52:56 -0700 Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> On 07/18/2018 07:04 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > After merging the net-next tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) produced this warning:
> >
> > *
> > * Restart config...
> > *
> > ....
> >
> > This is output by my "make allmodconfig" and only started after merging
> > the net-next tree today. It has continued for further merges/builds.
> >
> > I suspect commit
> >
> > 1323061a018a ("net: phy: sfp: Add HWMON support for module sensors")
> >
> > which added an "imply" clause.
> >
> I thought "imply" was better than "depends on HWMON || HWMON=n", but maybe
> not. Is that a caveat when using "imply", and does it mean that "imply"
> should better not be used ?
I don't know, sorry. It was just my best guess from what I could see
had changed.
I wonder if it makes a difference that I am doing my "make
allmodconfig" on top of a previous "make allmodconfig" and some symbols
are marked as "NEW" (though they are not symbols related to the changes
that happened during the net-next tree merge)?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists