On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:15:54PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > On 03/09/2017 07:08 PM, Miguel Robles wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 09:40:49AM -0800, Alison Schofield wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 09:36:54AM -0800, Alison Schofield wrote: > >>> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 04:59:39PM +0100, miguel.robles@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>>> On 2017-03-09 16:41, Daniel Baluta wrote: > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Miguel Robles <miguel.robles@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Hello all, > [...] > >>>>>> CONFIG_IIO_CONFIGFS=m > >>>>> > >>>>> Do you also have CONFIG_IIO_SW_DEVICE right? > >>>> > >>>> Yes, and the value is: CONFIG_IIO_SW_DEVICE=m. > >>>> > >>>> Thank you, > >>>> Miguel > >>>>> > >>>>> Will try to have a look at this asap. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> thanks, > >>>>> Daniel. > >>> > >>> Daniel, > >>> You probably saw, but just in case... > >>> I verified that the process, including the above mkdir, is working on > >>> 4.10-rc3. (So, I'm relieved the Outreachy applicants won't start > >>> hitting it.) > >>> alisons > >> > >> I see Lars' patch! > >> It worked for me because I used CONFIG_IIO_CONFIGFS built-in. > >> alisons > >> > > I applied Lar's patch and now the command is working fine! > > Even if I do not understand very well the patch. I mean, I always declared > > CONFIG_IIO_CONFIGFS, so the code should be normally always compiled. > > What the kernel build system does is when the symbol is select as built-in > (=y) it does `#define CONFIG_CONFIGFS_FS`. When the symbol is selected as a > module (=m) it does `#define CONFIG_CONFIGFS_FS_MODULE`. The IS_ENABLED() > macro basically checks for both and evaluates to true if either of them is > defined. > Now I undestand :). Thank you for your clear explanation. Miguel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
