On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:37:23AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:03 AM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > There is going to be a merge conflict between the commit in the > > net-next tree that adds the Sparc BPF JIT, and the one in here which > > adds arch/sparc/Kbuild. It should be quite easy to resolve. > > Ok, so that had a very obvious resolution, and a "cleaner, but scarier" version. > > I picked the cleaner but scarier one - the one that should make the > BFP JIT be built when you do "make arch/sparc" by putting the net > thing into the new arch/sparc/Kbuild file. OK. > > I did minimal testing with "make ARCH=sparc" without actually > *building* anything, and in the process also fixed the fact that you > should not select HAVE_BPF_JIT unless networking is enabled (crappy > interface - maybe that "if NET" part really should be in the > HAVE_BPF_JIT rules, not in all the architectures?) HAVE_BPF_JIT is only used to make the BPF_JIT prompt visible. And BPF_JIT depends on NET. So the "if NET" part in the select is redundant but not strictly wrong. Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
