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