On 06/03/11 10:42, Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Mark Brown > <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 11:04:52AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: >> >>> I ended up not pushing this one to Linus. Turns out it causes other >>> breakage on other platforms that don't include include/linux/gpio.h. >>> Since I don't have confidence that I'll be able to find all the >>> offenders, I'm dropping it. I recommend making any drivers that are >> >> So, this originally came about because I pushed back on adding random >> dependencies like this for features which are pretty much optional in >> drivers - their use of GPIOs is totally optional and the dependencies >> are just too fragile, leading to noise with all the randconfigs. It >> seems better to get the architectures to keep up with enhancements to >> gpiolib (or convert to it) than to have to worry about this in drivers. > > Fair enough. Randy, if you or someone else can check that all GPIOF_ > users have the required #include <linux/gpio.h>, then I'm okay with > this patch. OK, I'll look at that. Do you have any examples of builds that failed with this patch? thanks, -- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
