Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next:Tree for Oct 11 (mmc))
From: Andrei Warkentin
Date: Tue Oct 11 2011 - 19:48:55 EST
----- Original Message -----
> From: "NamJae Jeon" <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Andrei Warkentin" <awarkentin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "LKML" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Chris Ball"
> <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 7:20:48 PM
> Subject: Re: mmc core broken dependency on CONFIG_BLOCK (Was: linux-next: Tree for Oct 11 (mmc))
>
> Hi Randy, Andrei.
>
> I suggest third option for this.
> As you know, MMC like ATA Driver and SCSI Driver etc.. can not enable
> without CONFIG_BLOCK
> So I think that mmc should be depended from CONFIG_BLOCK like other
> block device driver.
> see the their Kconfig. How do you think ?
MMC core doesn't not imply MMC_BLOCK. You could well use SDIO devices via MMC without any flash storage whatsoever.
What I want to say is that MMC_BLOCK already depends on BLOCK. MMC, however, has no such functional dependence, as it
just (effectively) provides bus and device enumeration. So I think the better solution is wrapping all MMC partition
code within mmc/core/mmc.c and card.h with CONFIG_BLOCK.
A
--
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/