Re: NETPOLL=y , NETDEVICES=n compile error ( Re: 2.6.23-rc1-mm1 )

Matt Mackall
2007-08-02T15:59:56Z

On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:00:08AM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 09:02:19PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 11:59:21AM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 05:05:00PM +0200, Gabriel C wrote:
> > > > Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 12:14:36PM +0200, Gabriel C wrote:
> > > > >> Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > > > >>> On 28-07-2007 20:42, Gabriel C wrote:
> > > > >>>> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > >>>>> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:44:45 +0200 Gabriel C <nix.or.die@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ...
> > > > >>>>>> net/core/netpoll.c:155: error: 'struct net_device' has no member named 'poll_controller'
> ...
> > > > >>>>>> I think is because KGDBOE selects just NETPOLL.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Looks like it.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Select went and selected NETPOLL and NETPOLL_TRAP but things like
> > > > >>>>> CONFIG_NETDEVICES and CONFIG_NET_POLL_CONTROLLER remain unset. `select'
> > > > >>>>> remains evil.
> ...
> > > seems to select NET_POLL_CONTROLLER after selecting NETPOLL, but
> > > still doesn't check for NETDEVICES dependency.
> >
> > That's odd. Adding Sam to the cc:.
>
> Looks right, but after reading Andrew's opinion about select I'd be
> astonished if he doesn't know this problem already.
>
> >
> > > > >> Now KGDBOE just selects NETPOLL and NETPOLL_TRAP.
> > > > >> Adding 'select CONFIG_NET_POLL_CONTROLLER' let kgdboe compiles but the question is does it work without any ethernet card ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Why kgdboe should care what netpoll needs? So, I hope, you are adding
> > > > > this select under config NETPOLL. On the other hand, if NETPOLL should
> > > > > depend on NET_POLL_CONTROLLER there is probably no reason to have them
> > > > > both.
> > > >
> > > > NET_POLL_CONTROLLER has def_bool NETPOLL if NETDEVICES .
> > > >
> > > > Net peoples ping ?:)
> >
> > How about cc:ing the netpoll maintainer?
>
> Is there a new one or do you suggest possibility of abusing the
> authority of the netpoll's author with such trifles...?!

I'm just subtly suggesting that if you're going to have a discussion
about netpoll, you ought to cc: me.

> There are some notions about "other diagnostic tools" in some
> net drivers, eg. 3c509.c, so there would be a little bit of
> work if, after changing this, they really exist (and even if
> not - maybe it's reasonable to save such possibility for the
> future?).

I created it for netpoll, only netpoll clients have ever cared.

--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.