On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Paul Bolle wrote: > Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]> > --- > 0) This patch is untested: I have neither the hardware nor the toolchain > needed. It should be correct (though it makes an already too long line > even longer). Nevertheless I think a proper solution is a patch that > drops this warning entirely. I've CC'd the m68k people for further > feedback. > > 1) If SERIAL_8250_HP300 is set but neither HPDCA nor HPAPCI are set we > end up with an elaborate nop, don't we? Initialization should always > fail in that case. So effectively SERIAL_8250_HP300 depends on HPDCA > and/or HPAPCI. Was there perhaps some problem in translating that > dependency into a Kconfig dependency? > > 2) Related question: is it useful to have both HPDCA and HPAPCI set? > > drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c > index c13438c..dc41fbb 100644 > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ > #include "8250.h" > > #if !defined(CONFIG_HPDCA) && !defined(CONFIG_HPAPCI) > -#warning CONFIG_8250 defined but neither CONFIG_HPDCA nor CONFIG_HPAPCI > defined, are you sure? > +#warning CONFIG_SERIAL_8250 defined but neither CONFIG_HPDCA nor > CONFIG_HPAPCI defined, are you sure? > #endif
What is the point of this warning anyway? Shouldn't everything necessary be taken care of by Kconfig rules? -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
