From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adrian Bunk Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:15:32 +0100 Message-ID: <20050316181532.GA3251@stusta.de> References: <20050315121930.GE3189@stusta.de> <200503161611.j2GGBT0F004479@ginger.cmf.nrl.navy.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: shemminger@osdl.org, bridge@osdl.org, linux-atm-general@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: chas3@users.sourceforge.net Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200503161611.j2GGBT0F004479@ginger.cmf.nrl.navy.mil> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 11:11:29AM -0500, chas williams - CONTRACTOR wrote: > In message <20050315121930.GE3189@stusta.de>,Adrian Bunk writes: > >This patch fixes the following compile error with CONFIG_BRIDGE=y and > >CONFIG_ATM_LANE=m: > > isnt the problem more that CONFIG_ATM=m not CONFIG_ATM_LANE=m? > perhaps CONFIG_BRIDGE should be dependent on CONFIG_ATM. if > atm is a module then bridge cannot be a module (unless the > hooks are moved from atm to bridge)? The problem is currently CONFIG_ATM_LANE due to the #ifdef's in net/atm/common.c . Letting CONFIG_BRIDGE depend on CONFIG_ATM doesn't sound like a good idea, since I doubt all people using the Bridge code require ATM support. Moving the hooks to the bridge code will give you exactly the same problems the other way round. cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed