On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 01:24:41PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
quoted text > On 08/03/2010 01:15 PM, Américo Wang wrote:
> >
> > And it doesn't make sense to hold two drivers in one .c file.
> >
>
> I meant when two drivers share the same .c file. But instead of
> using a third common module they just share it by duplicating
> the code. example:
>
> <Kbuild>
> drv1-y := drv-one.o common.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_DRV1) += drv1.o
>
> drv2-y := drv-two.o common.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_DRV2) += drv2.o
> </Kbuild>
>
> When compiling common.o the KBUILD_MODNAME fails to be set
Correct - but I do not think this is relavent in this case.
The code snippet shown clearly indicates that the drivers
uses a 2.4 style Makefile. This will not work with 2.6.
Sam
--
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
Re: how about KBUILD_MODNAME , Sam Ravnborg , (Tue Aug 3, 4:02 am)