On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:21:41AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 01:29:18PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > We don't build some providers if DMA is not supported, but we still > > installed the renamed kernel header in this case. This causes package > > builds to fail because the sed script in debian/rules will remove the mlx5 > > stuff indiscriminately if DMA is not supported. > > > > Simple fix is to be consistent and not include any mlx5 stuff if mlx5 is > > not built. > > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > kernel-headers/CMakeLists.txt | 1 - > > providers/mlx5/CMakeLists.txt | 3 ++- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > Benjamin, this should fix the build failures I saw from the debian > > autobuilder.. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Will it break compilation of applications which use those files? No, the header is only included by mlx5dv.h, which is already not being installed > Why don't we fix sed script in debian/rules instead of creating extra > rules and hacks for kernel-headers? This is more consistent with what we are already doing. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
