Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752020AbaKEVUI (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Nov 2014 16:20:08 -0500 Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:38040 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750936AbaKEVUG (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Nov 2014 16:20:06 -0500 Message-ID: <1415222401.7485.13.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/13] backports: update dependencies map file From: Johannes Berg To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , backports@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yann.morin.1998@free.fr, mmarek@suse.cz, sassmann@kpanic.de Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 22:20:01 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20141105201326.GP12953@wotan.suse.de> References: <1415157517-15442-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <1415157517-15442-7-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <1415174051.2589.6.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20141105201326.GP12953@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.7-1 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 On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 21:13 +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 08:54:11AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-11-04 at 19:18 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" > > > > > > During development of kernel integration support using CONFIG_BACKPORT > > > was evaluated as a prefix over CPTCFG even for packaging backports, > > > for some reason this change lifted some restrictions one some device > > > drivers which was present before and as such requires some changes to > > > the dependencies map file to ensure correct compilation for respective > > > kernel versions. > > > > This is confusing ... I think what you're trying to say is that you > > noticed it because your integration system was broken and not honouring > > restrictions properly? > > No I verified each reported case I got and verified the issues found > were valid. For some reason some of these drivers were not allowed to > compile on some older versions, and from what me and Hauke could tell > they should, but they weren't. So the new annotations on requirements > are valid. Right, ok, it's just a roundabout way of describing that you audited the dependencies and found some unnecessary ones :-) johannes -- 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/