Thread (10 messages) 10 messages, 5 authors, 2012-11-02

Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 31 (ehci, dbgp)

From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: 2012-11-02 15:39:33
Also in: lkml

On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:20:27AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
On 02.11.12 at 15:01, Alan Stern [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Alan Stern [off-list ref] 11/01/12 9:39 PM >>>
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Alan Stern [off-list ref] 11/01/12 4:28 PM >>>
Evidently we need to change your new test in
drivers/usb/early/ehci-dbgp.c to:

#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_USB_HCD_EHCI) || defined(CONFIG_USB_CHIPIDEA_HOST)

Upcoming changes to ehci-hcd will make this unnecessary in 3.8, but for 
now we need it.
Which tells me that the CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT version would have been
the better one  (and I would favor that over the ugly variant you suggest
above).
I also suggested IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_USB), which is no uglier than what 
you submitted and would also fix this build error.  How about using it 
instead?
Yes, that's better. Question then is - updated original patch or incremental 
one?

Greg will probably want an incremental patch, because the original has 
already been merged.
I actually sent both (the incremental as attachment - I hope that's
going to be acceptable to him) in a submission earlier today.
Ah, okay, good.

Greg, whichever version you take, you can add:

Acked-by: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Thanks for that, as you guessed, I have to take the incremental one as
the first is already applied.

greg k-h
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help