Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:59:20 +0100 | Subject | Re: OLPC power management patches - merge for 3.1? | From | Daniel Drake <> |
| |
On 24 July 2011 04:20, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net> wrote: > I have no objection to merging OLPC patches, but they should build > without errors.
Agreed! Thanks for reporting the issue.
> Looks like this problem is caused by: > > config OLPC_XO1_SCI > bool "OLPC XO-1 SCI extras" > depends on OLPC && OLPC_XO1_PM && POWER_SUPPLY > > or > config OLPC_XO15_SCI > bool "OLPC XO-1.5 SCI extras" > depends on OLPC && ACPI && POWER_SUPPLY > > In both cases, the 'bool' depends on one or more tristate symbols, so > the tristates are satisfied if they are =m or =y. This should work fine > if these kconfig symbols (listed above) were tristate instead of bool.
In this case, we do need them to be bool options. At least for now. We tried for a modular design earlier in the review process but it added too much complexity.
So, whats the best way to fix the Kconfig? Should we:
depends on POWER_SUPPLY=y
or
depends on POWER_SUPPLY select POWER_SUPPLY
?
Thanks, Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |