On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 14:50 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On 13-03-07 02:25 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 14:15:54 -0500 Paul Gortmaker > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> [v2: essentially unchanged since v1, so I've left the acked/reviewed > >> tags. There was a compile fail[1] for a randconfig with EARLY_PRINTK=y > >> and PRINTK=n, because the early_console struct and early_printk calls > >> were nested within an #ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK -- moving that whole block > >> exactly as-is to be outside the #ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK fixes the randconfig > >> and still works for everyday sane configs too.] > >> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-next&m=136219350914998&w=2 [] > This brings up a recurring question. I was tempted to just go make > CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK depend on CONFIG_PRINTK, but lately I've faced > pushback when trying to "fix" things like seeing ARM OMAP USB options > for an x86 build[1], and GOLDFISH virt drivers being offered even > when the end user already said no to GOLDFISH[2].
I think that's the right solution and I see no obvious insurmountable downside. http://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/2/97 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
