On Saturday 30 June 2012, Thierry Reding wrote: > > I think that all the drivers that are not converted to the common PWM > > layer yet should depend on not enabling the common code. Once they > > are all moved over, that dependency will go away. > > Right. That's exactly what I meant. If we add depends on !HAVE_PWM to > the PWM symbol that should result in both options conflicting, and > therefore not being built at the same time. But I would add it to all other ones then, not the generic one! One question though: if the generic pwm implementation does not set HAVE_PWM, how can a driver check its presence? Arnd -- 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
