| Message ID | 51CB8CB7.6010006@asianux.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: > The related driver need depend on HAS_IOMEM, or may be built under UML > architecture. > > The related error (with allmodconfig, without pcap): > > CC [M] drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.o > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c: In function ‘pch_remove’: > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:571:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘iounmap’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c: In function ‘pch_probe’: > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:621:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘ioremap’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:621:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default] > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 06/27/2013 02:48 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: >> > The related driver need depend on HAS_IOMEM, or may be built under UML >> > architecture. >> > >> > The related error (with allmodconfig, without pcap): >> > >> > CC [M] drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.o >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c: In function ‘pch_remove’: >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:571:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘iounmap’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c: In function ‘pch_probe’: >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:621:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘ioremap’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:621:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default] >> > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> > Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Thanks.
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:52:07 +0800 > @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ config DP83640_PHY > config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH > tristate "Intel PCH EG20T as PTP clock" > depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST This "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST" does not exist in either 'net' or 'net-next'. Please submit your patches against a clean checkout of the networking GIT tree, rather than something else such as linux-next. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 06/29/2013 12:23 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> > Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:52:07 +0800 > >> > @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ config DP83640_PHY >> > config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH >> > tristate "Intel PCH EG20T as PTP clock" >> > depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST > This "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST" does not exist in either 'net' or 'net-next'. > Please submit your patches against a clean checkout of the networking GIT tree, > rather than something else such as linux-next. Oh, really it is, It is my fault (originally I get mail address from "./scripts/get_maintainers.pl", but not give additional check on it). For your information (or implicit suggestion), if one module wants to request 'COMPILE_TEST', the platforms (or asm-generic) is recommended to try to support it. It seems I still have the chance to continue discuss about it with platform guys. ;-) Thanks.
Am 01.07.2013 03:34, schrieb Chen Gang: > On 06/29/2013 12:23 PM, David Miller wrote: >> From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> >> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:52:07 +0800 >> >>>> @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ config DP83640_PHY >>>> config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH >>>> tristate "Intel PCH EG20T as PTP clock" >>>> depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST >> This "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST" does not exist in either 'net' or 'net-next'. >> Please submit your patches against a clean checkout of the networking GIT tree, >> rather than something else such as linux-next. > > Oh, really it is, It is my fault (originally I get mail address from > "./scripts/get_maintainers.pl", but not give additional check on it). > > For your information (or implicit suggestion), if one module wants to > request 'COMPILE_TEST', the platforms (or asm-generic) is recommended to > try to support it. > > It seems I still have the chance to continue discuss about it with > platform guys. ;-) David told you that your patch does not apply. Not even Linus' tree has "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST". Please adjust your patch. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 07/01/2013 01:40 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 01.07.2013 03:34, schrieb Chen Gang: >> > On 06/29/2013 12:23 PM, David Miller wrote: >>> >> From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> >>> >> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:52:07 +0800 >>> >> >>>>> >>>> @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ config DP83640_PHY >>>>> >>>> config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH >>>>> >>>> tristate "Intel PCH EG20T as PTP clock" >>>>> >>>> depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST >>> >> This "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST" does not exist in either 'net' or 'net-next'. >>> >> Please submit your patches against a clean checkout of the networking GIT tree, >>> >> rather than something else such as linux-next. >> > >> > Oh, really it is, It is my fault (originally I get mail address from >> > "./scripts/get_maintainers.pl", but not give additional check on it). >> > >> > For your information (or implicit suggestion), if one module wants to >> > request 'COMPILE_TEST', the platforms (or asm-generic) is recommended to >> > try to support it. >> > >> > It seems I still have the chance to continue discuss about it with >> > platform guys. ;-) > David told you that your patch does not apply. > Not even Linus' tree has "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST". > Please adjust your patch. Before send the patch, it is better to discuss the "asm-generic" whether need consider 'COMPILE_TEST'. config COMPILE_TEST bool "Compile also drivers which will not load" default n help Some drivers can be compiled on a different platform than they are intended to be run on. Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support), developers still, opposing to distributors, might want to build such drivers to compile-test them. If you are a developer and want to build everything available, say Y here. If you are a user/distributor, say N here to exclude useless drivers to be distributed. I guess, 'COMPILE_TEST' is really useful for UML. Thanks.
Am 01.07.2013 08:09, schrieb Chen Gang: > On 07/01/2013 01:40 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am 01.07.2013 03:34, schrieb Chen Gang: >>>> On 06/29/2013 12:23 PM, David Miller wrote: >>>>>> From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> >>>>>> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:52:07 +0800 >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ config DP83640_PHY >>>>>>>>>> config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH >>>>>>>>>> tristate "Intel PCH EG20T as PTP clock" >>>>>>>>>> depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST >>>>>> This "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST" does not exist in either 'net' or 'net-next'. >>>>>> Please submit your patches against a clean checkout of the networking GIT tree, >>>>>> rather than something else such as linux-next. >>>> >>>> Oh, really it is, It is my fault (originally I get mail address from >>>> "./scripts/get_maintainers.pl", but not give additional check on it). >>>> >>>> For your information (or implicit suggestion), if one module wants to >>>> request 'COMPILE_TEST', the platforms (or asm-generic) is recommended to >>>> try to support it. >>>> >>>> It seems I still have the chance to continue discuss about it with >>>> platform guys. ;-) >> David told you that your patch does not apply. >> Not even Linus' tree has "depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST". >> Please adjust your patch. > > > Before send the patch, it is better to discuss the "asm-generic" > whether need consider 'COMPILE_TEST'. No. > config COMPILE_TEST > bool "Compile also drivers which will not load" > default n > help > Some drivers can be compiled on a different platform than they are > intended to be run on. Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even > when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support), > developers still, opposing to distributors, might want to build such > drivers to compile-test them. > > If you are a developer and want to build everything available, say Y > here. If you are a user/distributor, say N here to exclude useless > drivers to be distributed. > > I guess, 'COMPILE_TEST' is really useful for UML. No. We have explained you more than once what the deal and why UML does not have ioremap() and friends. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 07/01/2013 02:34 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> config COMPILE_TEST >> > bool "Compile also drivers which will not load" >> > default n >> > help >> > Some drivers can be compiled on a different platform than they are >> > intended to be run on. Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even >> > when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support), >> > developers still, opposing to distributors, might want to build such >> > drivers to compile-test them. >> > >> > If you are a developer and want to build everything available, say Y >> > here. If you are a user/distributor, say N here to exclude useless >> > drivers to be distributed. >> > >> > I guess, 'COMPILE_TEST' is really useful for UML. > No. > > We have explained you more than once what the deal and why UML does not > have ioremap() and friends. This time, it is not for UML, it is for 'COMPILE_TEST': the 'asm-generic' whether need consider it. Thanks.
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: > On 07/01/2013 02:34 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>> config COMPILE_TEST >>> > bool "Compile also drivers which will not load" >>> > default n >>> > help >>> > Some drivers can be compiled on a different platform than they are >>> > intended to be run on. Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even >>> > when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support), >>> > developers still, opposing to distributors, might want to build such >>> > drivers to compile-test them. >>> > >>> > If you are a developer and want to build everything available, say Y >>> > here. If you are a user/distributor, say N here to exclude useless >>> > drivers to be distributed. >>> > >>> > I guess, 'COMPILE_TEST' is really useful for UML. >> No. >> >> We have explained you more than once what the deal and why UML does not >> have ioremap() and friends. > > This time, it is not for UML, it is for 'COMPILE_TEST': the > 'asm-generic' whether need consider it. COMPILE_TEST is only meant to be used as a dependency in Kconfig files, to make drivers that cannot work due to missing hardware invisible when configuring your kernel. There should be no #ifdefs in actual code that check for (the lack of) CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 07/01/2013 03:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: >> > On 07/01/2013 02:34 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>>> >>> config COMPILE_TEST >>>>> >>> > bool "Compile also drivers which will not load" >>>>> >>> > default n >>>>> >>> > help >>>>> >>> > Some drivers can be compiled on a different platform than they are >>>>> >>> > intended to be run on. Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even >>>>> >>> > when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support), >>>>> >>> > developers still, opposing to distributors, might want to build such >>>>> >>> > drivers to compile-test them. >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>> > If you are a developer and want to build everything available, say Y >>>>> >>> > here. If you are a user/distributor, say N here to exclude useless >>>>> >>> > drivers to be distributed. >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>> > I guess, 'COMPILE_TEST' is really useful for UML. >>> >> No. >>> >> >>> >> We have explained you more than once what the deal and why UML does not >>> >> have ioremap() and friends. >> > >> > This time, it is not for UML, it is for 'COMPILE_TEST': the >> > 'asm-generic' whether need consider it. > COMPILE_TEST is only meant to be used as a dependency in Kconfig files, > to make drivers that cannot work due to missing hardware invisible when > configuring your kernel. > Why "Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support)" ? > There should be no #ifdefs in actual code that check for (the lack of) > CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST. In ideal world, it should be no #ifdefs for all "CONFIG_*" in 'normal code'. But "asm-generic" are not belong to 'normal code', it is one of the main place to process "CONFIG_*". If the platforms need support 'COMPILE_TEST', the asm-generic is the main place for implementing it. So I think our focus is on "whether the platforms guys need support 'COMPILE_TEST" for modules guys". Thanks
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: > On 07/01/2013 03:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: >>> > On 07/01/2013 02:34 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>>>> >>> config COMPILE_TEST >>>>>> >>> > bool "Compile also drivers which will not load" >>>>>> >>> > default n >>>>>> >>> > help >>>>>> >>> > Some drivers can be compiled on a different platform than they are >>>>>> >>> > intended to be run on. Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even >>>>>> >>> > when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support), >>>>>> >>> > developers still, opposing to distributors, might want to build such >>>>>> >>> > drivers to compile-test them. >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> >>> > If you are a developer and want to build everything available, say Y >>>>>> >>> > here. If you are a user/distributor, say N here to exclude useless >>>>>> >>> > drivers to be distributed. >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> >>> > I guess, 'COMPILE_TEST' is really useful for UML. >>>> >> No. >>>> >> >>>> >> We have explained you more than once what the deal and why UML does not >>>> >> have ioremap() and friends. >>> > >>> > This time, it is not for UML, it is for 'COMPILE_TEST': the >>> > 'asm-generic' whether need consider it. >> COMPILE_TEST is only meant to be used as a dependency in Kconfig files, >> to make drivers that cannot work due to missing hardware invisible when >> configuring your kernel. > > Why "Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even when they load they > cannot be used due to missing HW support)" ? > >> There should be no #ifdefs in actual code that check for (the lack of) >> CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST. > > In ideal world, it should be no #ifdefs for all "CONFIG_*" in 'normal code'. > > But "asm-generic" are not belong to 'normal code', it is one of the main > place to process "CONFIG_*". > > If the platforms need support 'COMPILE_TEST', the asm-generic is the > main place for implementing it. > > So I think our focus is on "whether the platforms guys need support > 'COMPILE_TEST" for modules guys". COMPILE_TEST is to be used as a dependency if the code would compile, but would not run. Adding fixes in the code to make more code compile is not the job of COMPILE_TEST. If we follow your reasoning, we can add dummy variants of all hardware support that lives in arch/*/include/asm to asm-generic, so everything would compile for all platforms. But that's now what we want. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 07/01/2013 03:56 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: >> > On 07/01/2013 03:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote: >>>>> >>> > On 07/01/2013 02:34 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> config COMPILE_TEST >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > bool "Compile also drivers which will not load" >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > default n >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > help >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > Some drivers can be compiled on a different platform than they are >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > intended to be run on. Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support), >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > developers still, opposing to distributors, might want to build such >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > drivers to compile-test them. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > If you are a developer and want to build everything available, say Y >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > here. If you are a user/distributor, say N here to exclude useless >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > drivers to be distributed. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> > I guess, 'COMPILE_TEST' is really useful for UML. >>>>>>> >>>> >> No. >>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>> >>>> >> We have explained you more than once what the deal and why UML does not >>>>>>> >>>> >> have ioremap() and friends. >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>> > This time, it is not for UML, it is for 'COMPILE_TEST': the >>>>> >>> > 'asm-generic' whether need consider it. >>> >> COMPILE_TEST is only meant to be used as a dependency in Kconfig files, >>> >> to make drivers that cannot work due to missing hardware invisible when >>> >> configuring your kernel. >> > >> > Why "Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even when they load they >> > cannot be used due to missing HW support)" ? >> > >>> >> There should be no #ifdefs in actual code that check for (the lack of) >>> >> CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST. >> > >> > In ideal world, it should be no #ifdefs for all "CONFIG_*" in 'normal code'. >> > >> > But "asm-generic" are not belong to 'normal code', it is one of the main >> > place to process "CONFIG_*". >> > >> > If the platforms need support 'COMPILE_TEST', the asm-generic is the >> > main place for implementing it. >> > >> > So I think our focus is on "whether the platforms guys need support >> > 'COMPILE_TEST" for modules guys". > COMPILE_TEST is to be used as a dependency if the code would compile, > but would not run. Adding fixes in the code to make more code compile is not > the job of COMPILE_TEST. > But from the explanation of 'COMPILE_TEST' in its Kconig, it seems not like what you said. e.g."Despite they cannot be loaded there (or even when they load they cannot be used due to missing HW support)" Can we allow the module to 'COMPILE_TEST' under one platform which not support the related HW. > If we follow your reasoning, we can add dummy variants of all hardware support > that lives in arch/*/include/asm to asm-generic, so everything would compile > for all platforms. But that's now what we want. "If HW support, implement default one, else do nothing" is more like "default work", not "generic work". "asm-generic" has already added default implementation for all platforms, it also checked whether the HW support or not, that means at least more than 80% works has done. So if we still call it "asm-generic", I recommend to implement dummy one. Thanks.
Am 01.07.2013 09:56, schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven: > If we follow your reasoning, we can add dummy variants of all hardware support > that lives in arch/*/include/asm to asm-generic, so everything would compile > for all platforms. But that's now what we want. I hope you meant *not* want? Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote: > Am 01.07.2013 09:56, schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven: >> If we follow your reasoning, we can add dummy variants of all hardware support >> that lives in arch/*/include/asm to asm-generic, so everything would compile >> for all platforms. But that's now what we want. > > I hope you meant *not* want? Sorry, s/now/not/ Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 07/01/2013 07:19 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at> wrote: >> > Am 01.07.2013 09:56, schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven: >>> >> If we follow your reasoning, we can add dummy variants of all hardware support >>> >> that lives in arch/*/include/asm to asm-generic, so everything would compile >>> >> for all platforms. But that's now what we want. >> > >> > I hope you meant *not* want? > Sorry, s/now/not/ I can understand your feelings, I also can understand if none of my patches for 'asm-generic' will be applied. Most of patches for 'asm-generic' should be for 'important' (e.g. duty definition: whether should support 'COMPILE_TEST', what's the meaning of 'generic'). But this kind of patches are not 'emergent', they need be given more considerations (they are not for applying, the are for thinking). For duty definition, it is not for what we want to do, it is for what we should do (or what we have to do). At last, I will send related patches for 'COMPILE_TEST' (I can understand if not applied, or no response). And also should send another patch for HAS_IOMEM about ptp driver (also cc to you all). Thanks.
diff --git a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig index 5be73ba..5a7910e 100644 --- a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ config DP83640_PHY config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH tristate "Intel PCH EG20T as PTP clock" depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST + depends on HAS_IOMEM select PTP_1588_CLOCK help This driver adds support for using the PCH EG20T as a PTP
The related driver need depend on HAS_IOMEM, or may be built under UML architecture. The related error (with allmodconfig, without pcap): CC [M] drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.o drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c: In function ‘pch_remove’: drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:571:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘iounmap’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c: In function ‘pch_probe’: drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:621:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘ioremap’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] drivers/ptp/ptp_pch.c:621:13: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default] cc1: some warnings being treated as errors Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> --- drivers/ptp/Kconfig | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)