Lior David <li...@codeaurora.org> writes:

> On 8/8/2017 2:03 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Maya Erez <qca_me...@qca.qualcomm.com> writes:
>> 
>>> From: Gidon Studinski <qca_gid...@qca.qualcomm.com>
>>>
>>> Since debugfs is a kernel configuration option, enable the driver to
>>> compile without debugfs.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gidon Studinski <qca_gid...@qca.qualcomm.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Maya Erez <qca_me...@qca.qualcomm.com>

[...]

>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
>>>  int wil6210_debugfs_init(struct wil6210_priv *wil);
>>>  void wil6210_debugfs_remove(struct wil6210_priv *wil);
>>> +#else
>>> +static inline int wil6210_debugfs_init(struct wil6210_priv *wil) { return 
>>> 0; }
>>> +static inline void wil6210_debugfs_remove(struct wil6210_priv *wil) {}
>>> +#endif
>> 
>> I was thinking more that should we have CONFIG_WIL6210_DEBUGFS, just
>> like we have CONFIG_ATH10K_DEBUGFS and CONFIG_ATH9K_DEBUGFS? This way it
>> can be controlled per driver if debugfs interface is available or not.
>> 
> Hi Kalle, I am answering instead of Maya, she is currently on holiday.
> We will consider this and resend the patch.

Ok, no rush.

> Is it possible to apply the other patches in the v4 series except this one and
> patch #2 (the scan timeout module parameter)?

I was actually planning to do exactly that. I was just waiting for
kbuild bot results because I had to fix a trivial conflict after
removing patch 2.

-- 
Kalle Valo

Reply via email to