Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 3 authors, 2012-12-29

Re: [PATCH] Fix problem with cpufreq_pndemand or cpufreq_conservative

From: Larry Finger <hidden>
Date: 2012-12-28 23:46:01
Also in: lkml

On 12/28/2012 05:01 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, December 28, 2012 04:17:24 PM Larry Finger wrote:
quoted
Since commit 2aacdff entitled "cpufreq: Move common part from governors to
separate file", whenever the drivers that depend on this new file
(cpufreq_ondemand or cpufreq_conservative) are built as modules, a new module
named cpufreq_governor is created. It seems that kmake is smart enough to create
a separate module whenever more than one module includes the same object file.
As drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.c contains no MODULE directives, the
resulting module has no license specified, which results in logging of a "module
license 'unspecified' taints kernel". In addition, a number of globals are
exported GPL only, and are therefore not available.

Signed-off-by: Larry Finger <redacted>
---

This particular patch is the simplest possible; however, it hides the intent. I
have prepared the longer version that makes the reason clearer by adding a new
configuration variable that is dependent on the other two, and rearranges
drivers/cpufreq/Makefile. That version could be submitted if that is what is
desired.
Yes, please.
I'll send it shortly.
quoted
The changes to cpufreq_governor.c are the same as in this version.
I wonder if that's avoidable?  The intention is not to create an additional
module, clearly.
It appears not to be possible. I don't know enough about to kmake to understand 
why it is forcing a new module. Perhaps some expert knows what Kconfig or 
Makefile magic will prevent that.

Larry


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