Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933456Ab3GDDGs (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jul 2013 23:06:48 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:7185 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932633Ab3GDDGq (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jul 2013 23:06:46 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=Tr1kdUrh c=1 sm=0 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:17 a=Drc5e87SC40A:10 a=6tI4O6vlircA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=S9odRq4Da1AA:10 a=SKJaEs8bBnoayXaqYEEA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 67.255.60.225 Message-ID: <1372907201.22688.147.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [PATCH] include/asm-generic/io.h: add dummy fuctions to support 'COMPILE_TEST' in 'asm-generic'. From: Steven Rostedt To: Chen Gang F T Cc: Chen Gang , Greg KH , Arnd Bergmann , Geert Uytterhoeven , Richard Weinberger , Jeff Dike , David Sharp , "sfr@canb.auug.org.au" , Ingo Molnar , uml-devel , uml-user , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux-Arch , Mark Brown , David Miller , Andrew Morton , Jiri Kosina , Jiri Slaby Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 23:06:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <51D4E133.2010201@gmail.com> References: <51CA8AB8.7080504@asianux.com> <51D375AA.5060300@asianux.com> <201307031014.12583.arnd@arndb.de> <51D3E440.7090105@asianux.com> <51D4C87E.5070605@asianux.com> <20130704011221.GA11230@kroah.com> <51D4D4A0.6080401@asianux.com> <1372903390.22688.139.camel@gandalf.local.home> <51D4D9A4.3020402@gmail.com> <1372904975.22688.142.camel@gandalf.local.home> <51D4E133.2010201@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1427 Lines: 44 On Thu, 2013-07-04 at 10:42 +0800, Chen Gang F T wrote: > Hmm..., I think maybe also has another way: get rid of 'COMPILE_TEST' > (regress the related patch, which is only existent in next-* tree). I'm not working on linux-next at the moment. Hmm, I'm not even working on mainline at the moment, the kernel I have is still 3.10-rc5. > > Or could you provide your suggestions or completions about it ? > > Thanks. > > > I'm still confused by what you are trying to accomplish. > > Currently, I am trying to compile all architectures with allmodconfig in > next-* tree (which will have "COMPILE_TEST=y"). > > So I can find and solve the related issues (I am one of contributors). > So, you want all archs to pass an allmodconfig? Well, one thing is, if a module doesn't build for an arch, then why not keep that module from building for that arch. If module foo.ko doesn't build for arch bazinga, then just add in the Kconfig for the module foo: config FOO depends on !BAZINGA Then that module wont build for the specific arch, and all are happy. If someone someday wants to support module foo for arch bazinga, then they can fix module foo for that arch. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/