* Grant Likely wrote: > On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 21:01:12 +0200, Thierry Reding > <[email protected]> wrote: > > * Thierry Reding wrote: > > > This commit adds an empty of_property_match_string() function for > > > !CONFIG_OF builds. > > > > Grant, Rob, > > > > can these two patches be queued for 3.5? I need them to build the PWM > > subsystem for !OF builds. > > I could merge them, but can you point me at the code that needs them? > I get a little nervous when OF-specific stretches of code get compiled > when !CONFIG_OF. In a lot of cases the OF data decoding should be in > a separate function that gets completely selected out. That isn't > always the case of course, but I do like to put a bit of back-pressure > on this issue.
The latest series for the PWM subsystem is here[0]. However that version doesn't contain the latest changes that require this. I haven't pushed those changes yet because they cause the build to fail (because of these two missing patches). Arnd Bergmann recommended to not #ifdef the CONFIG_OF code out but instead use the IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) construct and let the compiler's DCE handle this so that we get full compile coverage for the code, even in !OF configurations. Thierry [0]: http://gitorious.org/linux-pwm/linux-pwm
pgprvOTUKDANl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
