[PATCH 0/2] UBI(FS): fixing IS_ENABLED() usage + backport trees

[Brian Norris]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 16:31 -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
>>  2) IS_ENABLED() has changed some between v3.3 and when this commit was
>>  originally integrated in mainline, so it masks a compile error in the
>>  mainline version
>
> Not sure what you mean. It was introduced in 3.1
> (2a11c8ea20bf850b3a2c60db8c2e7497d28aba99), so I have to back-port it
> older ubifs backport trees.

I was referring to
kconfig: fix IS_ENABLED to not require all options to be defined
69349c2dc01c489eccaa4c472542c08e370c6d7e
which was introduced in 3.4. I think this masks some errors in your
mainline patch, but when you backport between 3.1..3.4-rc2, you get
compilation errors.

>> This patch series addresses issue 1. I suggest that this be backported to
>> the appropriate UBIFS tree to solve some build failures. But I think issue
>> 2 may still be a problem, so perhaps the mainline IS_ENABLED() fix should
>> be backported as well?
>
> I guess you are talking about commit
> 69349c2dc01c489eccaa4c472542c08e370c6d7e ? I'll port it too, thanks.

Right, I was talking about this fix (above); but on second thought,
you may not need to port it. It is only needed to mask your error, but
now that it's fixed, you don't need the port. But I didn't look very
closely :)

Regards,
Brian