From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd.bergmann@linaro•org>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design•de>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au>,
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 11:06:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201207031106.42915.arnd.bergmann@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120703100049.GA8455@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de>
On Tuesday 03 July 2012, Thierry Reding wrote:
> Show Details
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 08:59:11AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 03 July 2012, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > I came up with the attached patch. What do you think? It fixes the
> > > PowerPC allyesconfig issue for me.
> >
> > This one looks correct, but I would still do it the other way around,
> > putting the depends statements into the locations of the other drivers.
> > The main difference is that we can then independently convert the
> > remaining drivers, without having merge conflicts in the same line
> > every time we remove one of the dependencies.
>
> The downside of that approach, however, is to make PWM override other
> settings. For instance if you have TWL6030_PWM selected and then decide
> to also select PWM, then the former will be automatically deselected to
> satisfy the dependency. I'm not sure if that's desired.
It's true that this may be confusing, but I think it's the right
approach for future multiplatform kernels. If we have e.g. a combined
omap+ux500+imx kernel, we can only have one implementation of the
PWM interfaces, and that should be the new one.
It's less clear for the other architectures. Maybe a mixed approach
is better there, making CONFIG_PWM depend on !MACH_JZ4740 &&
!PUV3_NB0916 && !BLACKFIN, but letting the remaining ARM versions
of the PWM code depend on !PWM.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-03 11:06 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
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 [this message]
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=201207031106.42915.arnd.bergmann@linaro.org \
--to=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$(echo .)auug.org.au \
--cc=thierry.reding@avionic-design$(echo .)de \
/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