[Precise SRU][PATCH 0/1] Build failure with CONFIG_POWER_SUPPLY=m

[Luis Henriques]

Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com> writes:

> On 05/28/2012 04:21 PM, Anca Emanuel wrote:
>> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Luis Henriques
>> <luis.henriques at canonical.com> wrote:
>>> BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1005264
>>>
>>> == Precise SRU Justification ==
>>>
>>> Current kernel FTBFS if power_supply is set as a module.  This has never
>>> been an issue as its built-in into the kernel.  It fails with:
>>>
>>>  "sysfs_create_link_nowarn" [drivers/power/power_supply.ko] undefined!"
>>>
>>> as this symbol is not exported into modules.
>>>
>>> == Fix ==
>>>
>>> Upstream commit 93278d151e7bd35ccd0e083d7f2d8123cbaf36f8 fixes the build
>>> failure.
>>>
>>> == Impact ==
>>>
>>> Impact shouldn't be very high.  Only users building the kernel from source
>>> and setting this as a module.
>>>
>>> == Test Case ==
>>>
>>> Build the kernel, setting CONFIG_POWER_SUPPLY=m in the configuration.
>>>
>>> Anton Vorontsov (1):
>>>  power_supply: Drop usage of nowarn variant of sysfs_create_link()
>>>
>>>  drivers/power/power_supply_core.c |    2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> --
>>> 1.7.9.5
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> kernel-team mailing list
>>> kernel-team at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
>> 
>> This style is wrong. You are duplicating Ben Hutchings efforts.
>> Somebody need to talk to Debian.
>> 
>
> Do you mean that Luis should have sent this to Ben for inclusion into
> 3.2.y stable ?

If that's what Anca meant, I have actually checked the status of this
patch on -stable before submitting it to kernel-team ML.  The patch
doesn't make sense there -- the affected code doesn't exist in the
stable tree and, if I understand correctly the stable tree rules, it
will probably never hit 3.2.y.

Cheers,
--
Luis