netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error

To: chas3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] fix bridge <-> ATM compile error
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:15:32 +0100
Cc: shemminger@xxxxxxxx, bridge@xxxxxxxx, linux-atm-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200503161611.j2GGBT0F004479@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20050315121930.GE3189@xxxxxxxxx> <200503161611.j2GGBT0F004479@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 11:11:29AM -0500, chas williams - CONTRACTOR wrote:
> In message <20050315121930.GE3189@xxxxxxxxx>,Adrian Bunk writes:
> >This patch fixes the following compile error with CONFIG_BRIDGE=y and 
> >CONFIG_ATM_LANE=m:
> 
> isnt the problem more that CONFIG_ATM=m not CONFIG_ATM_LANE=m?
> perhaps CONFIG_BRIDGE should be dependent on CONFIG_ATM.  if
> atm is a module then bridge cannot be a module (unless the 
> hooks are moved from atm to bridge)?

The problem is currently CONFIG_ATM_LANE due to the #ifdef's in 
net/atm/common.c .

Letting CONFIG_BRIDGE depend on CONFIG_ATM doesn't sound like a good 
idea, since I doubt all people using the Bridge code require ATM 
support.

Moving the hooks to the bridge code will give you exactly the same 
problems the other way round.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>