On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 10:06:54AM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 05:52:39PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 31 May 2001 08:08:45 +0200,
> > Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz> wrote:
> > >On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 11:29:06AM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
> > >> With your patch, if a user selects CONFIG_INPUT_GAMEPORT=m and
> > >> CONFIG_SOUND_ES1370=y then the built in es1370 driver has unresolved
> > >> references to gameport_register_port() which is in a module, vmlinux
> > >> will not link. That is why I derived CONFIG_INPUT_GAMEPORT based on
> > >> the config options in two separate directories.
> > >
> > >Have you tried the patch? Because the gameport.h define has:
> > >
> > >#if defined(CONFIG_INPUT_GAMEPORT) || (defined(CONFIG_INPUT_GAMEPORT_MODULE) && defined(MODULE))
> > >void gameport_register_port(struct gameport *gameport);
> > >void gameport_unregister_port(struct gameport *gameport);
> > >#else
> > >void __inline__ gameport_register_port(struct gameport *gameport) { return; }
> > >void __inline__ gameport_unregister_port(struct gameport *gameport) { return; }
> > >#endif
> >
> > When the user has gameport hardware compiled it as a module and they
> > have es1371 bult into the kernel then es1371 silently ignores the
> > gameport, even if the gameport modules has been loaded. This violates
> > the principle of least surprise, a user configuring both gameport and
> > es1371 expects to use the gameport, kbuild should support that instead
> > of silently ignoring the combination.
>
> True. Is this worse than the ugliness in your patch?
How about a warning displayed in the config process?
-- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 31 2001 - 21:00:50 EST