lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (pwm tree related)
    Date
    On Tuesday 03 July 2012, Thierry Reding wrote:
    > On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 04:18:46PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
    > > Hi Thierry,
    > >
    > > On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 08:11:15 +0200 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > 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.
    > >
    > > CONFIG_HAVE_PWM only exists on arm, mips and unicore32 ... so the "select
    > > HAVE_PWM" will not do anything on any other architecture.
    >
    > So one option would be to add HAVE_PWM on powerpc, or alternatively to
    > explicitly add a conflict to the TWL6030_PWM symbol (and any others that
    > implement the legacy API). I'd think the second alternative is
    > preferable and actually matches what Arnd proposed previously. Maybe
    > this was exactly the reason he suggested that solution in the first
    > place.

    It's not what I was thinking of explicitly, but it's a good
    reason nonetheless ;-)

    Arnd


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-07-03 10:41    [W:2.550 / U:0.076 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site