Re: [RFC 2/5]arch:powerpc:sysdev:Makefile Remove unused config in the Makefile.

[Justin Mattock <justinmattock@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 09:58:19 -0700
> "Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The patch below removes an unused config variable found by using a kernel
>> cleanup script.
>> Note: I did try to cross compile these but hit erros while doing so..
>> (gcc is not setup to cross compile) and am unsure if anymore needs to be done.
>> Please have a look if/when anybody has free time.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@gmail.com>
>> CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
>> CC: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
>>
>> ---
>>  arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile |    1 -
>>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile
>> index 1e0c933..243b6ad 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile
>> @@ -18,7 +18,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_PMC)               += fsl_pmc.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_LBC)                += fsl_lbc.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_GTM)                += fsl_gtm.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_MPC8xxx_GPIO)   += mpc8xxx_gpio.o
>> -obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM)    += fsl_85xx_l2ctlr.o fsl_85xx_cache_sram.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SIMPLE_GPIO)    += simple_gpio.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_RIO)                += fsl_rio.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_TSI108_BRIDGE)  += tsi108_pci.o tsi108_dev.o
>
> Those files do exist, and aren't pulled in by any other means I can see.
> It was introduced by commit 6db92cc9d07db9f713da8554b4bcdfc8e54ad386, whose
> changelog says:
>        Drivers can do the following in Kconfig to use these APIs "select
> FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM if MPC85xx"
>
> Now, the absence of such a kconfig option[1] is a problem, but I don't think
> outright removal (labelled "trivial cleanup") is appropriate, unless nobody
> fixes it after the problem is pointed out.  And if it is removed, the files
> should go with it.
>
> -Scott
>
> [1] and of any drivers that select it, though this was added fairly
> recently -- perhaps such a driver change is on its way?
>
>

ahh.. so the:  fsl_85xx_l2ctlr.o fsl_85xx_cache_sram.o is still in use
even though FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM is not really used, but really is used!!

but might be wrong with this.

-- 
Justin P. Mattock