On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Paul Bolle wrote:
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@xxxxxxxxxx> --- 0) This patch is untested: I have neither the hardware nor the toolchain needed. It should be correct (though it makes an already too long line even longer). Nevertheless I think a proper solution is a patch that drops this warning entirely. I've CC'd the m68k people for further feedback. 1) If SERIAL_8250_HP300 is set but neither HPDCA nor HPAPCI are set we end up with an elaborate nop, don't we? Initialization should always fail in that case. So effectively SERIAL_8250_HP300 depends on HPDCA and/or HPAPCI. Was there perhaps some problem in translating that dependency into a Kconfig dependency? 2) Related question: is it useful to have both HPDCA and HPAPCI set? drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c index c13438c..dc41fbb 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250_hp300.c @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ #include "8250.h" #if !defined(CONFIG_HPDCA) && !defined(CONFIG_HPAPCI) -#warning CONFIG_8250 defined but neither CONFIG_HPDCA nor CONFIG_HPAPCI defined, are you sure? +#warning CONFIG_SERIAL_8250 defined but neither CONFIG_HPDCA nor CONFIG_HPAPCI defined, are you sure? #endif
What is the point of this warning anyway? Shouldn't everything necessary be taken care of by Kconfig rules? -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
