From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net-next tree Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 02:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20120620.025837.721158723130014230.davem@davemloft.net> References: <3170667.1PZa2330KE@harkonnen> <20120620.020611.1696375957120854262.davem@davemloft.net> <5059693.iaLYtpk3E4@harkonnen> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:36558 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753811Ab2FTJ6i (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jun 2012 05:58:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <5059693.iaLYtpk3E4@harkonnen> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: federico.vaga@gmail.com Cc: mkl@pengutronix.de, bhupesh.sharma@st.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, giancarlo.asnaghi@st.com, wg@grandegger.com From: Federico Vaga Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:59:26 +0200 >> Then the driver should NEVER have been submitted without the >> required infrastructure in place first. > > This particular driver don't use the clk framework at the moment. I put > that lines about clk to try to be generic as possibile, but I see that I > made a mistake: I'm sorry. Why would you try to be generic by using an interface currently only available on certain platforms? That is how you make drivers non-portable, and not generic.