Re: [PATCH 9/9] staging: brcm80211: move utility functions into new module

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:58:20PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 05/10/2011 06:18 AM, Julian Calaby wrote:
> >Arend, Henry,
> >
> >One problem I noticed with your patch:
> >
> >On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 00:33, Arend van Spriel<arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> >>From: Henry Ptasinski<henryp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >>Move utility functions shared by the brcmsmac and brcmfmac drivers into a new
> >>module, brcmutil.ko.  This eliminates the need to compile and link the shared
> >>functions into both drivers.  Prefix all exported symbols with "bcm_".
> >>
> >>Cc: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Reviewed-by: Brett Rudley<brudley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel<arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>---
> >>  drivers/staging/brcm80211/Makefile                |    1 +
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/staging/brcm80211/Makefile b/drivers/staging/brcm80211/Makefile
> >>index c064cdf..287ad0e 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/staging/brcm80211/Makefile
> >>+++ b/drivers/staging/brcm80211/Makefile
> >>@@ -19,5 +19,6 @@
> >>  subdir-ccflags-y                                       := -DBCMDMA32
> >>  subdir-ccflags-$(CONFIG_BRCMDBG)       += -DBCMDBG -DBCMDBG_ASSERT
> >>
> >>+obj-m                  += util/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_BRCMFMAC) += brcmfmac/
> >>  obj-$(CONFIG_BRCMSMAC) += brcmsmac/
> >You should not use obj-m directly - the way this is set up, if module
> >support is disabled, then the driver will fail as the brcmutil module
> >will not be built. This might also happen if the drivers are built
> >into the kernel ('y' rather than 'm')
> >
> >You should create a new Kconfig variable (say BRCMWLUTIL) and use some
> >Kconfig trickery to ensure that it's built properly for the drivers
> >that need it, then replace this line with something like
> >
> >obj-$(CONFIG_BRCMWLUTIL)
> >
> >The LIB80211 symbol used by the Intel 2x00 (old non-mac80211) wireless
> >drivers uses similar trickery to ensure that everything is built
> >properly.
> Hi Greg,
> 
> We were informed about this potential problem. Should I resend this
> patch or fix it with a separate patch?

Resend it with a fixed version, I'll just not apply this one in the
series for now.

thanks,

greg k-h
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux