On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:19:41AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 04:09:10PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:03:59AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > > Then should I just mark the driver as broken on ARM? > > Well, at least ARM on SMP, for !SMP the missing function is defined and > will be inlined. Then some Kconfig dependancies could be tweaked to try to make this work properly, not building the driver where it will be broken. > > Any reason for not including the driver authors on the Cc: for this > > patch? > > I wasn't sure who the driver author is in the long list of persons from > the get_maintainer script. So it was more or less lazyness :) > > Should I try to get that patch through the driver authors instead of > you? At least cc: them to have them weigh in on the issue, I know they are trying to do something in this area, but I didn't think it was the same as your patch. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
