At Fri, 22 May 2015 11:06:37 +0200,
Paul Bolle wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2015-05-22 at 10:44 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Fri, 22 May 2015 10:17:48 +0200,
> > Paul Bolle wrote:
> > > Luis also tried to explain to me that disabling FW_LOADER shouldn't make
> > > the build fail. (And, of course, we could decide to not care about
> > > randconfig builds that have EXPERT set. Maybe we could even special case
> > > EXPERT in randconfig. But that would make randconfig builds less useful.
> > > That's a separate issue, anyhow.)
> >
> > But FW_LOADER is a tristate, so it might be inconsistent if selected
> > randomly? Luis' patch doesn't add depends but just removes select.
>
> include/linux/firmware.h contains:
> #if defined(CONFIG_FW_LOADER) || (defined(CONFIG_FW_LOADER_MODULE) &&
> defined(MODULE)
> int request_firmware(const struct firmware **fw, const char *name,
> struct device *device);
> [...]
> #else
> static inline int request_firmware(const struct firmware **fw,
> const char *name,
> struct device *device)
> {
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> [...]
> #endif
>
> So I _think_ the build should be fine.
Ah, OK, that would work.
> But, in case of built-in users of request_firmware() and friends,
> actually using that build might not go as expected. But if you set
> EXPERT and disable FW_LOADER, or as you point out, set it to 'm', you
> own the pieces when things break, don't you?
Yeah, I'm not against it, too. My concern is only about the silent
breakage.
Thinking of this again, I also concluded that removing the mostly
superfluous "select FW_LOADER" would make things easier in the end.
> But now I'm doing Luis' job. I didn't sign off on that patch! So let's
> hope Luis thought of all the corner cases.
Heh, let's hope we all reach to a happy end.
thanks,
Takashi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
