From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBED5DDDF9 for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 21:08:11 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't build arch/powerpc/sysdev/dcr.c for ARCH=ppc kernels From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Josh Boyer In-Reply-To: <1191495405.3647.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20071004044911.30154.23109.stgit@trillian.cg.shawcable.net> <1191495405.3647.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:08:04 +1000 Message-Id: <1191496084.6245.0.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 05:56 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 22:50 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > From: Grant Likely > > > > dcr.c is an arch/powerpc only thing. > > > > Signed-off-by: Grant Likely > > --- > > > > Ben/Paulus, > > > > As far as I can tell this is correct. Having sysdev/dcr.c in the arch/ppc > > build spits out warnings. Grep doesn't show anything in arch/ppc that > > is using it. > > Sorry, no. The ibm_emac driver uses it, which is arch/ppc. (Yes, the > old one.) > > If there are warnings, let's fix those up. Perhaps Michael's recent > patches in that area introduced something. What does it use of dcr.c ? Initially, the 4xx bits where totally inline, but maybe Michael's patches is changing that ? Ben.