Re: [PATCH -next] driver core: fix build for CONFIG_BLOCK=n

[Randy Dunlap]

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:30:06 -0700 Greg KH wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:47:51PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:16:29 -0700 Greg KH wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:15:41AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:31:15 -0700 Greg KH wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 09:20:34AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > > > > From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Fix build when CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled (since SEP-06).
> > > > > > Fixes these build errors:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > drivers/base/core.c: In function 'get_device_parent':
> > > > > > drivers/base/core.c:622: error: 'block_class' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > > > drivers/base/core.c: In function 'device_add_class_symlinks':
> > > > > > drivers/base/core.c:712: error: 'block_class' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > > > drivers/base/core.c: In function 'device_remove_class_symlinks':
> > > > > > drivers/base/core.c:742: error: 'block_class' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > 
> > > > > This should no longer be needed with the next linux-next tree as the
> > > > > logic in this area has changed thanks to Andi's patch.
> >                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > {sorry about resend, email problems}
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Still seeing this build error. (linux-next 2010-0923)
> > > > Will you be merging some patch soon?
> > > 
> > > Not unless someone provides it.  I know of no valid user of the kernel
> > > that does not enable CONFIG_BLOCK, so I really doubt this will ever hit
> > > anyone in "real life" so it's _way_ down the list of things I have to do
> > > at the moment, sorry.

Maybe you should just submit a patch to remove CONFIG_BLOCK.
(and many other kconfig symbols)

> > so what was your comment about Andi's patch (above)?
> 
> It's merged already, and because of it, your patch failed to apply.


OK, so I disagree with your comment:
> > > > > This should no longer be needed with the next linux-next tree as the
> > > > > logic in this area has changed thanks to Andi's patch.

but I now understand that my patch failed to apply.  Thanks for the info.

---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
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/