On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 07:59:08PM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:

On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 19:55 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:

quoted

On 28/05/2014 at 18:09:43 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote :

quoted

On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 17:59 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:

quoted

On 28/05/2014 at 14:24:27 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote :

quoted

quoted

quoted

 config ATMEL_PWM
 	tristate "Atmel AT32/AT91 PWM support"
-	depends on HAVE_CLK && (AVR32 || ARCH_AT91 || COMPILE_TEST)
+	depends on HAVE_CLK
+	depends on AVR32 || AT91SAM9263 || AT91SAM9RL || AT91SAM9G45

Symbols AT91SAM9263, AT91SAM9RL, and AT91SAM9G45 do not seem to exist in
next-20140528. Should these perhaps be SOC_AT91SAM9263, SOC_AT91SAM9RL,
and SOC_AT91SAM9G45 and/or ARCH_AT91SAM9263, ARCH_AT91SAM9RL, and
ARCH_AT91SAM9G45?

I wouldn't bother too much fixing that, this will definitely be remove
in 3.17. 

Are you talking about: 1) the problem this patch tried to fix; or 2) the
problem it created?

I'm removing the whole atmel_pwm driver so the CONFIG_ATMEL_PWM symbol
will be gone.

So the patch we're discussing here will never be included in a release?

So, should I just remove it right now?  I like deleting files :)

thanks,

greg k-h