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:0.061 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site