Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 31 (ehci, dbgp)

[Jan Beulich]

>>> Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 11/01/12 9:39 PM >>>
>On Thu, 1 Nov 2012, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 11/01/12 4:28 PM >>>
>> >Evidently we need to change your new test in
>> >drivers/usb/early/ehci-dbgp.c to:
>> >
>> >#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_USB_HCD_EHCI) || defined(CONFIG_USB_CHIPIDEA_HOST)
>> >
>> >Upcoming changes to ehci-hcd will make this unnecessary in 3.8, but for 
>> >now we need it.
>> 
>> Which tells me that the CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT version would have been
>> the better one  (and I would favor that over the ugly variant you suggest
>> above).
>
>I also suggested IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_USB), which is no uglier than what 
>you submitted and would also fix this build error.  How about using it 
>instead?

Yes, that's better. Question then is - updated original patch or incremental one?

Jan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/