From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [mtd:spi-mem-ecc 30/30] ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: nand_ecc_unregister_on_host_hw_engine
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 18:35:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220202183500.7e4ef7cb@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YfquJwtbg/hF5WJF@sirena.org.uk>
Hi Mark,
broonie@kernel.org wrote on Wed, 2 Feb 2022 16:15:35 +0000:
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 04:34:52PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 03:45:04PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>
> > > > I've failed to prevent faulty configurations with regular depends
> > > > on/select keywords, so I've come with a new solution which received a
> > > > successful build coverage test from the 0-day robots.
>
> > > > In order to still be able to use the spi controller driver (=y) while
> > > > mtd is =m or =n, I need to add an IS_REACHABLE() check in a couple of
> > > > headers. This way we can just imply the right MTD symbols from the
> > > > SPI_MXIC Kconfig entry.
>
> > > Isn't this just a case where we shouldn't allow MTD to be built modular?
>
> > How would you do that in a nice Kconfig way?
>
> depends on MTD=y if SPI_MXC=y
In this case I believe we should also add
depends on MTD=m if SPI_MXC=m ?
Anyway, this would force building the ECC support (and MTD...) even
though we don't need it in most cases.
My idea was to give people the right to only select SPI_MXIC without
really caring about MTD/ECC support at all because this is IMHO a
valid use case. We would then save a few kiB of extra MTD fat.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Miquèl
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [mtd:spi-mem-ecc 30/30] ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: nand_ecc_unregister_on_host_hw_engine
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2022 18:35:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220202183500.7e4ef7cb@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YfquJwtbg/hF5WJF@sirena.org.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1328 bytes --]
Hi Mark,
broonie(a)kernel.org wrote on Wed, 2 Feb 2022 16:15:35 +0000:
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 04:34:52PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 03:45:04PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:
>
> > > > I've failed to prevent faulty configurations with regular depends
> > > > on/select keywords, so I've come with a new solution which received a
> > > > successful build coverage test from the 0-day robots.
>
> > > > In order to still be able to use the spi controller driver (=y) while
> > > > mtd is =m or =n, I need to add an IS_REACHABLE() check in a couple of
> > > > headers. This way we can just imply the right MTD symbols from the
> > > > SPI_MXIC Kconfig entry.
>
> > > Isn't this just a case where we shouldn't allow MTD to be built modular?
>
> > How would you do that in a nice Kconfig way?
>
> depends on MTD=y if SPI_MXC=y
In this case I believe we should also add
depends on MTD=m if SPI_MXC=m ?
Anyway, this would force building the ECC support (and MTD...) even
though we don't need it in most cases.
My idea was to give people the right to only select SPI_MXIC without
really caring about MTD/ECC support at all because this is IMHO a
valid use case. We would then save a few kiB of extra MTD fat.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Miquèl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-02 17:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-01 5:28 [mtd:spi-mem-ecc 30/30] ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: nand_ecc_unregister_on_host_hw_engine kernel test robot
2022-02-01 5:28 ` kernel test robot
2022-02-02 14:45 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 14:45 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 15:20 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 15:20 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 15:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 15:34 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 16:15 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 16:15 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 17:35 ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2022-02-02 17:35 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 18:04 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 18:04 ` Mark Brown
2022-02-02 21:31 ` Miquel Raynal
2022-02-02 21:31 ` Miquel Raynal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220202183500.7e4ef7cb@xps13 \
--to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.