Re: Applied "regulator: max8973: add support for junction thermal warning" to the regulator tree

[Mark Brown]

On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 01:17:37PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:

> Here driver is built in binary and THERMAL is the loadable module.

> Do we really have THERMAL as module i.e. basic framework?

If randconfig can generate it it's valid.  

> -#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL_OF
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THERMAL
>  static int max8973_thermal_read_temp(void *data, int *temp)
>  {
>         struct max8973_chip *mchip = data;

That looks like a hack that might break, I'd not expect it to help here
and probably has some other config that can generate issues.  What I
think should be happening here is something like

	depends on THERMAL_OF if THERMAL_OF

or similar (ie, there's a direct dependency once the config is enabled).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature