>>> On 24.09.10 at 20:55, Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:26:33AM -0000, Jan Beulich wrote: >> PCI specific code is needed only when Atom CPUs are potentially >> supported by the kernel. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Rudolf Marek <r.marek@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> --- >> drivers/hwmon/Kconfig | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >> >> --- linux-2.6.36-rc4/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig 2010-09-13 08:45:02.000000000 +0200 >> +++ 2.6.36-rc4-x86-coretemp-maybe-pci/drivers/hwmon/Kconfig 2010-09-10 > 16:24:16.000000000 +0200 >> @@ -401,7 +401,8 @@ config SENSORS_GL520SM >> >> config SENSORS_CORETEMP >> tristate "Intel Core/Core2/Atom temperature sensor" >> - depends on X86 && PCI && EXPERIMENTAL >> + depends on X86 && EXPERIMENTAL >> + depends on PCI || (!MATOM && !GENERIC_CPU && !X86_GENERIC) >> help >> If you say yes here you get support for the temperature >> sensor inside your CPU. Most of the family 6 CPUs > > Resending my reply to this one as well. Again, apologies if there is > duplication. > > The coretemp code unconditionally calls pci functions, even if PCI is not > defined. > I am concerned that this might cause problems. It might be better to stick > with > the more generic dependency instead of trying to optimize too much. pci.h takes care to define stub inline functions for the !CONFIG_PCI case. It seemed largely odd for a driver like this to depend on PCI at all, and hence I think it is more transparent to make the needs explicit. Jan _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
