[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y6H6/U0w96Z4kpDn@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 10:12:13 -0800
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Allen Webb <allenwebb@...gle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-modules@...r.kernel.org" <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/10] rockchip-mailbox: Fix typo
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 08:58:36AM -0600, Allen Webb wrote:
> As mentioned in a different sub-thread this cannot be built as a
> module so I updated the commit message to:
>
> imx: Fix typo
>
> A one character difference in the name supplied to MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE
> breaks compilation for SOC_IMX8M after built-in modules can generate
> match-id based module aliases, so fix the typo.
Are you saying that it is a typo *now* only, and fixing it does not fix
compilation now, but that fixing the typo will fix a future compilation
issue once your patches get merged for built-in module aliases?
> This was not caught earlier because SOC_IMX8M can not be built as a
> module and MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE is a no-op for built-in modules.
Odd, so why did it use MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE then? What was the reason for
the driver having MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE if it was a no-op?
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists