[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZZ_cBlOSW9VCjkOv@bogus>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 12:16:06 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
Cc: Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
Atish Kumar Patra <atishp@...osinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 1/2] ACPI: Enable ACPI_PROCESSOR for RISC-V
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 11:00:12AM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
[...]
> Also, interestingly, it looks like this ancient line
>
> obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR) += processor.o
>
> in drivers/acpi/Makefile should be removed,
No
> since there's no drivers/acpi/processor.c file.
Correct, but ..
> I guess the make process silently filters object files which don't have
> corresponding source files?
May be, but I doubt if that is the case here.
processor.o is just aggregation of all processor_*.o and this will be
the processor.ko when built as a module.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists