[PATCH 0/5] drivers/tty: make more bool drivers explicitly non-modular
alexandre.belloni at free-electrons.com
Wed Oct 21 01:38:12 PDT 2015
On 20/10/2015 at 20:20:07 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote :
> [Re: [PATCH 0/5] drivers/tty: make more bool drivers explicitly non-modular] On 20/10/2015 (Tue 17:10) Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > On 18/10/2015 at 18:21:13 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote :
> > > The one common thread here for all the patches is that we also
> > > scrap the .remove functions which would only be used for module
> > > unload (impossible) and driver unbind. For the drivers here, there
> > > doesn't seem to be a sensible unbind use case (vs. e.g. a multiport
> > > PCI ethernet driver where one port is unbound and passed through to
> > > a kvm guest or similar). Hence we just explicitly disallow any
> > > driver unbind operations to help prevent root from doing something
> > > illogical to the machine that they could have done previously.
> > >
> > > We've already done this for drivers/tty/serial/mpsc.c previously.
> > >
> > > Build tested for allmodconfig on ARM64 and powerpc for tty/tty-testing.
> > >
> > So, how does this actually build test atmel_serial?
> Not sure why this should be a surprise; I build test it exactly like this:
CONFIG_SERIAL_ATMEL is not selected by allmodconfig on arm64 or powerpc
so this is not explaining how you build tested atmel_serial.
> paul at builder-02:~/git/linux-head$ echo $ARCH
> paul at builder-02:~/git/linux-head$ echo $CROSS_COMPILE
> paul at builder-02:~/git/linux-head$ make O=../arm-build/ drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.o
> make: Entering directory '/home/paul/git/arm-build'
> arch/arm64/Makefile:25: LSE atomics not supported by binutils
> CHK include/config/kernel.release
> Using /home/paul/git/linux-head as source for kernel
> GEN ./Makefile
> CHK include/generated/uapi/linux/version.h
> CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h
> HOSTCC scripts/sign-file
> HOSTCC scripts/extract-cert
> CC drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.o
> make: Leaving directory '/home/paul/git/arm-build'
> paul at builder-02:~/git/linux-head$
> It did build; no warning/error. Would you call it an invalid build test?
What you describe is a different test. I end up with 4 warnings when
doing that on my machine.
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
More information about the linux-arm-kernel