On Saturday, May 18, 2013 07:45:45 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 18 May 2013 05:10, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Well, I actually meant "can you please verify your belief?". :-) > > > > And that's because I'm wondering why the zero-day build testing doesn't > > catch this problem. Apparently, it doesn't build .configs with cpufreq > > governors configured as modules, although I believe it does test > > "make allmodconfig" for a couple of architectures at least. What gives? > > My assumption was wrong. Actually cpufreq_governor.c is never compiled > as module, but cpufreq_ondemand is... > > And this routine isn't used from cpufreq_ondemand but cpufreq_governor.. > > But we were lucky that we didn't get a error here and EXPORT_SYMBOL > is still required :) Although not necessarily 3.10 material I suppose? Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
