Re: 2.6.19 -mm merge plans

David Woodhouse
2006-09-23T09:53:08Z

On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 01:06 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> WARNING: "register_mtd_blktrans" [drivers/mtd/rfd_ftl.ko] undefined!
> WARNING: "deregister_mtd_blktrans" [drivers/mtd/rfd_ftl.ko] undefined!
> WARNING: "add_mtd_blktrans_dev" [drivers/mtd/rfd_ftl.ko] undefined!
> WARNING: "del_mtd_blktrans_dev" [drivers/mtd/rfd_ftl.ko] undefined!

Ah, I hadn't realised that 'bool FOO depends on tristate BAR' would
allow FOO=y, BAR=m. And since we don't recurse into drivers/mtd at all
when building vmlinux and CONFIG_MTD=m, setting CONFIG_SSFDC=y would
mean that it _thought_ it was building mtd_blkdevs.c into the kernel but
in fact it wasn't. I hadn't tested that combination, since it makes no
sense -- yet it's what allmodconfig does. Sorry 'bout that.

I've fixed this by making SSFDC a tristate, and I've fixed it
differently for CMDLINEPARTS which has had the same problem for ages.

> Quick review:
>
> - search for "( " and " )", fix.

Not sure which you're referring to -- there's a NULL-terminated array of
strings which seems just fine as it is, and there's a size vs. C-H-S
table. The latter could _possibly_ use C99 initialisers, but for
something so simple I think it would just get in the way. It's an
entirely local structure anyway -- it's defined just above the table.
We don't have to worry about the initialiser getting out of sync with
the structure definition, so I didn't see the point in mandating C99
initialisers for it, since Claudio chose to do otherwise. It's his
choice, as far as I'm concerned.

I did notice that he misspelled 'MiB' and fix that though :)

> - Might want to do something about the 512-byte automatic variable in
> get_valid_cis_sector()

Done. Thanks for spotting that.

--
dwmw2