On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 05:11:42PM -0200, Murilo Opsfelder Araujo wrote: > This patch gets rid of the following error when compiling r8192U_core.c > and CONFIG_WIRELESS_EXT is not defined: > > drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c: In function ‘rtl8192_usb_probe’: > drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c:4697:5: error: ‘struct net_device’ has no member named ‘wireless_handlers’ > dev->wireless_handlers = (struct iw_handler_def *) &r8192_wx_handlers_def; > ^ > > Signed-off-by: Murilo Opsfelder Araujo <mopsfelder@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c > index e031a25..396a11f 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c > @@ -4694,7 +4694,9 @@ static int rtl8192_usb_probe(struct usb_interface *intf, > > dev->netdev_ops = &rtl8192_netdev_ops; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_WIRELESS_EXT > dev->wireless_handlers = (struct iw_handler_def *) &r8192_wx_handlers_def; > +#endif It's almost never correct to put a #ifdef in a .c file, so what is going on here? How do other drivers handle this in a more "proper" way? Is this something new? Should this driver just depend on this Kconfig option? I can't take this as-is, sorry. greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
