[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55764773-bf9a-94c9-ad2b-1c6e63879798@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 14:33:03 +0200
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
"David S . Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/net: lcs: fix build errors when FDDI is a loadable
module
Am 22.06.23 um 14:16 schrieb Alexandra Winter:
>
>
> On 22.06.23 09:53, Simon Horman wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 09:15:24AM +0200, Alexandra Winter wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21.06.23 23:37, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>> Require FDDI to be built-in if it is used. LCS needs FDDI to be
>>>> built-in to build without errors.
>>>>
>>>> Prevents these build errors:
>>>> s390-linux-ld: drivers/s390/net/lcs.o: in function `lcs_new_device':
>>>> drivers/s390/net/lcs.c:2150: undefined reference to `fddi_type_trans'
>>>> s390-linux-ld: drivers/s390/net/lcs.c:2151: undefined reference to `alloc_fddidev'
>>>>
>>>> This FDDI requirement effectively restores the previous condition
>>>> before the blamed patch, when #ifdef CONFIG_FDDI was used, without
>>>> testing for CONFIG_FDDI_MODULE.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 128272336120 ("s390/net: lcs: use IS_ENABLED() for kconfig detection")
> [...]
>>
>>> 2) I wonder whether
>>>
>>> depends on CCW && NETDEVICES && (ETHERNET || FDDI)
>>> + depends on FDDI || FDDI=n
>>>
>>> would do what we want here:
>>> When FDDI is a loadable module, LCS mustn't be built-in.
>>>
>>> I will do some experiments and let you know.
>>
>> It does seem to on my side.
>> But checking would be much appreciated.
>
>
> Here are my experiments:
Another suggestion. Why not remove the FDDI part of the lcs driver? This seems unused
without hardware for years now.Longterm we could even remove the whole lcs driver.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists