Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 6 Mar 2016 18:35:50 +0700 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: Applied "regulator: max8973: add support for junction thermal warning" to the regulator tree |
| |
On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 01:17:37PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> Here driver is built in binary and THERMAL is the loadable module.
> Do we really have THERMAL as module i.e. basic framework?
If randconfig can generate it it's valid.
> -#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL_OF > +#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL > static int max8973_thermal_read_temp(void *data, int *temp) > { > struct max8973_chip *mchip = data;
That looks like a hack that might break, I'd not expect it to help here and probably has some other config that can generate issues. What I think should be happening here is something like
depends on THERMAL_OF if THERMAL_OF
or similar (ie, there's a direct dependency once the config is enabled). [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |