On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 07:59:20AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > * Thierry Reding wrote: > > * Thierry Reding wrote: > > > 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). > > > > I just pushed the latest code to the for-next branch. That's the state that > > I > > was going to submit during the 3.5 merge window. > > > > Thierry > > > > > [0]: http://gitorious.org/linux-pwm/linux-pwm > > Hi Grant, > > Do you have any comments on this? I really want the PWM subsystem to go into > 3.6, and for that to happen we need to find a solution for this. As I stated > previously the empty functions are needed to compile the PWM core in !OF > configurations. > > Usually this would be solved by just #ifdef'ing the corresponding code, but > with the recent introduction of the config_enabled() and IS_ENABLED() macros > there seems to be a move to replace #ifdef usage with those in order to have > the corresponding code compile-checked in all configurations and have the > compiler throw away the unused code. > > I believe that this is a good thing, but it will required these empty OF > functions to be added. If you don't find this an acceptable solution, please > let me know and I'll convert the OF-specific code in the PWM core to use > #ifdef instead.
Grant, Rob, any update on this? Thierry
pgpYtLKGtoolA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
