Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:45:54 -0600 | From | Larry Finger <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix problem with cpufreq_pndemand or cpufreq_conservative |
| |
On 12/28/2012 05:01 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, December 28, 2012 04:17:24 PM Larry Finger wrote: >> Since commit 2aacdff entitled "cpufreq: Move common part from governors to >> separate file", whenever the drivers that depend on this new file >> (cpufreq_ondemand or cpufreq_conservative) are built as modules, a new module >> named cpufreq_governor is created. It seems that kmake is smart enough to create >> a separate module whenever more than one module includes the same object file. >> As drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c contains no MODULE directives, the >> resulting module has no license specified, which results in logging of a "module >> license 'unspecified' taints kernel". In addition, a number of globals are >> exported GPL only, and are therefore not available. >> >> Signed-off-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> >> --- >> >> This particular patch is the simplest possible; however, it hides the intent. I >> have prepared the longer version that makes the reason clearer by adding a new >> configuration variable that is dependent on the other two, and rearranges >> drivers/cpufreq/Makefile. That version could be submitted if that is what is >> desired. > > Yes, please.
I'll send it shortly.
>> The changes to cpufreq_governor.c are the same as in this version. > > I wonder if that's avoidable? The intention is not to create an additional > module, clearly.
It appears not to be possible. I don't know enough about to kmake to understand why it is forcing a new module. Perhaps some expert knows what Kconfig or Makefile magic will prevent that.
Larry
| |