From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S933126AbbDISNF (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:13:05 -0400
Received: from lb1-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net ([194.109.24.22]:35780 "EHLO
	lb1-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932833AbbDISND (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:13:03 -0400
Message-ID: <1428603178.13881.20.camel@x220>
Subject: Re: drm/msm/mdp5: undefined CONFIG_MSM_BUS_SCALING
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
        Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@gmail.com>,
        Hai Li <hali@codeaurora.org>,
        "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, rupran@einserver.de,
        stefan.hengelein@fau.de
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 20:12:58 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20150409170707.GA7742@kroah.com>
References: <20150409112240.GA4748@station.rsr.lip6.fr>
	 <CAF6AEGtLeQgwnPmMUN=ZECnW_uQ4NQx5XFeNXLjjfEuPe5o-3A@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20150409142024.GA3040@kroah.com>
	 <CAF6AEGsQ=dkREnU5bA=EJCF6o3h+DwcSUd1V2Hvu-rat5-+ypw@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20150409170707.GA7742@kroah.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 19:07 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> I really don't understand.  Why is this code in the kernel tree if it
> can't be built?  How does anyone use this?  By taking it and copying it
> where?  If it can't be built, and no one can update it, and of course
> not run it, why is it here?  What good is this code doing sitting here?

The Erlangen bot (courtesy of Valentin, Stefan, and Andreas) has taken
over what I've been doing for quite some time, but doing it much more
thoroughly. And my experience tells me that the reports they'll send in
will trigger more discussions like this one.

A lesson I learned from my daily checks for Kconfig oddities is that
people go to great lengths defending unbuildable code. (Do a web search
for ATHEROS_AR231X to find a discussion that dragged on for over three
years!) Personally I stopped caring after someone insisted on having a
file in the tree that was in no way connected to the build system: not a
single line in any of the Makefiles pointed at it. So, as far as I'm
concerned, if people can't point at a patch pending, somehow, somewhere,
that would make their code buildable one might as well delete the code.

I really think it's as simple as that.


Paul Bolle