From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design•de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@linaro•org>,
linux-next@vger•kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix•de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (pwm tree related)
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 08:11:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120703061115.GA27989@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120703154318.9e32d4a490c0b32e7d955ca4@canb.auug.org.au>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1269 bytes --]
On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 03:43:18PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 08:56:39 +0200 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design•de> wrote:
> >
> > But if we make the new PWM symbol conflict with HAVE_PWM, then it'll do
> > the right thing for any of the legacy PWM implementations, without
> > having to track them down. Furthermore it'll also keep the legacy
> > version by default and not allow the generic one to be enabled in that
> > case. This is more likely to cause less side-effects than the other way
> > around.
> >
> > > One question though: if the generic pwm implementation does not set
> > > HAVE_PWM, how can a driver check its presence?
> >
> > The driver depends on PWM. HAVE_PWM is the symbol for the legacy
> > implementations, while PWM is the new PWM API symbol.
>
> I am still getting the mutliple definition errors from my powerpc
> allyesconfg build.
>
> $ grep PWM .config
> CONFIG_TWL6030_PWM=y
> CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_PWM=y
> CONFIG_PWM=y
I don't see how that can happen. If you have CONFIG_TWL6030_PWM=y, then
you should also have CONFIG_HAVE_PWM=y, which would in turn conflict
with CONFIG_PWM=y.
I'll have to fetch a powerpc toolchain and try to reproduce this.
Thierry
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-03 6:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-29 7:48 linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (pwm tree related) Stephen Rothwell
2012-06-30 18:10 ` Thierry Reding
2012-06-30 19:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-06-30 19:41 ` Thierry Reding
2012-06-30 20:12 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-01 6:56 ` Thierry Reding
2012-07-03 5:43 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-03 6:11 ` Thierry Reding [this message]
2012-07-03 6:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-03 6:23 ` Thierry Reding
2012-07-03 8:06 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-03 8:11 ` Thierry Reding
2012-07-03 8:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-03 10:00 ` Thierry Reding
2012-07-03 11:06 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-03 11:14 ` Thierry Reding
2012-07-03 8:23 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2012-07-03 9:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120703061115.GA27989@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de \
--to=thierry.reding@avionic-design$(echo .)de \
--cc=arnd.bergmann@linaro$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix$(echo .)de \
--cc=sfr@canb$(echo .)auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox