[PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[Arnd Bergmann]

Drivers that use the SSB sprom functionality typically 'select SSB_SPROM'
from Kconfig, but CONFIG_SSB_HOST_SOC misses this, which results in
a build failure unless at least one of the other drivers that selects
it is enabled:

drivers/built-in.o: In function `ssb_host_soc_get_invariants':
(.text+0x459494): undefined reference to `ssb_fill_sprom_with_fallback'

This adds the same select statement that is used elsewhere.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 541c9a84cd85 ("ssb: pick SoC invariants code from MIPS BCM47xx arch")
---
I'm not sure who the right person is to pick up the fix. The patch that
introduced the problem was merged by Kalle through the iwlwifi tree.

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/Kconfig b/drivers/ssb/Kconfig
index 0c675861623f..d8e4219c2324 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/ssb/Kconfig
@@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ config SSB_SDIOHOST
 config SSB_HOST_SOC
 	bool "Support for SSB bus on SoC"
 	depends on SSB && BCM47XX_NVRAM
+	select SSB_SPROM
 	help
 	  Host interface for a SSB directly mapped into memory. This is
 	  for some Broadcom SoCs from the BCM47xx and BCM53xx lines.

[PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[Arnd Bergmann]

Drivers that use the SSB sprom functionality typically 'select SSB_SPROM'
from Kconfig, but CONFIG_SSB_HOST_SOC misses this, which results in
a build failure unless at least one of the other drivers that selects
it is enabled:

drivers/built-in.o: In function `ssb_host_soc_get_invariants':
(.text+0x459494): undefined reference to `ssb_fill_sprom_with_fallback'

This adds the same select statement that is used elsewhere.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 541c9a84cd85 ("ssb: pick SoC invariants code from MIPS BCM47xx arch")
---
I'm not sure who the right person is to pick up the fix. The patch that
introduced the problem was merged by Kalle through the iwlwifi tree.

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/Kconfig b/drivers/ssb/Kconfig
index 0c675861623f..d8e4219c2324 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/ssb/Kconfig
@@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ config SSB_SDIOHOST
 config SSB_HOST_SOC
 	bool "Support for SSB bus on SoC"
 	depends on SSB && BCM47XX_NVRAM
+	select SSB_SPROM
 	help
 	  Host interface for a SSB directly mapped into memory. This is
 	  for some Broadcom SoCs from the BCM47xx and BCM53xx lines.

Re: [PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> Drivers that use the SSB sprom functionality typically 'select SSB_SPROM'
> from Kconfig, but CONFIG_SSB_HOST_SOC misses this, which results in
> a build failure unless at least one of the other drivers that selects
> it is enabled:
>
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `ssb_host_soc_get_invariants':
> (.text+0x459494): undefined reference to `ssb_fill_sprom_with_fallback'
>
> This adds the same select statement that is used elsewhere.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 541c9a84cd85 ("ssb: pick SoC invariants code from MIPS BCM47xx arch")
> ---
> I'm not sure who the right person is to pick up the fix. The patch that
> introduced the problem was merged by Kalle through the iwlwifi tree.

I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
wireless-drivers trees.

-- 
Kalle Valo

[PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> Drivers that use the SSB sprom functionality typically 'select SSB_SPROM'
> from Kconfig, but CONFIG_SSB_HOST_SOC misses this, which results in
> a build failure unless at least one of the other drivers that selects
> it is enabled:
>
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `ssb_host_soc_get_invariants':
> (.text+0x459494): undefined reference to `ssb_fill_sprom_with_fallback'
>
> This adds the same select statement that is used elsewhere.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 541c9a84cd85 ("ssb: pick SoC invariants code from MIPS BCM47xx arch")
> ---
> I'm not sure who the right person is to pick up the fix. The patch that
> introduced the problem was merged by Kalle through the iwlwifi tree.

I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
wireless-drivers trees.

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: [PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 13 January 2016 at 23:51, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> Drivers that use the SSB sprom functionality typically 'select SSB_SPROM'
> from Kconfig, but CONFIG_SSB_HOST_SOC misses this, which results in
> a build failure unless at least one of the other drivers that selects
> it is enabled:
>
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `ssb_host_soc_get_invariants':
> (.text+0x459494): undefined reference to `ssb_fill_sprom_with_fallback'
>
> This adds the same select statement that is used elsewhere.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 541c9a84cd85 ("ssb: pick SoC invariants code from MIPS BCM47xx arch")

I missed this dependency, thanks, patch looks OK.

Re: [PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 13 January 2016 at 23:51, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> Drivers that use the SSB sprom functionality typically 'select SSB_SPROM'
> from Kconfig, but CONFIG_SSB_HOST_SOC misses this, which results in
> a build failure unless at least one of the other drivers that selects
> it is enabled:
>
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `ssb_host_soc_get_invariants':
> (.text+0x459494): undefined reference to `ssb_fill_sprom_with_fallback'
>
> This adds the same select statement that is used elsewhere.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 541c9a84cd85 ("ssb: pick SoC invariants code from MIPS BCM47xx arch")

I missed this dependency, thanks, patch looks OK.

[PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 13 January 2016 at 23:51, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> Drivers that use the SSB sprom functionality typically 'select SSB_SPROM'
> from Kconfig, but CONFIG_SSB_HOST_SOC misses this, which results in
> a build failure unless at least one of the other drivers that selects
> it is enabled:
>
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `ssb_host_soc_get_invariants':
> (.text+0x459494): undefined reference to `ssb_fill_sprom_with_fallback'
>
> This adds the same select statement that is used elsewhere.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 541c9a84cd85 ("ssb: pick SoC invariants code from MIPS BCM47xx arch")

I missed this dependency, thanks, patch looks OK.

Re: [PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[David Miller]

From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 08:46:29 +0200

> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
> wireless-drivers trees.

+1

[PATCH] ssb: host_soc depends on sprom

[David Miller]

From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 08:46:29 +0200

> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
> wireless-drivers trees.

+1

[PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Arnd Bergmann]

The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
front-end, but that results in a warning:

drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]

This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
place.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
---

On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
> wireless-drivers trees.

I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
that one too?

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/main.c b/drivers/ssb/main.c
index cde5ff7529eb..d1a750760cf3 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/main.c
+++ b/drivers/ssb/main.c
@@ -613,9 +613,10 @@ out:
 	return err;
 }
 
-static int ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
-			    ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
-			    unsigned long baseaddr)
+static int __maybe_unused
+ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
+		 ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
+		 unsigned long baseaddr)
 {
 	int err;
 

[PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Arnd Bergmann]

The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
front-end, but that results in a warning:

drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]

This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
place.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
---

On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
> wireless-drivers trees.

I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
that one too?

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/main.c b/drivers/ssb/main.c
index cde5ff7529eb..d1a750760cf3 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/main.c
+++ b/drivers/ssb/main.c
@@ -613,9 +613,10 @@ out:
 	return err;
 }
 
-static int ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
-			    ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
-			    unsigned long baseaddr)
+static int __maybe_unused
+ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
+		 ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
+		 unsigned long baseaddr)
 {
 	int err;
 

Re: [PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>> wireless-drivers trees.
>
> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
> that one too?

I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
Michael or Rafal :)

Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.

-- 
Kalle Valo

[PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>> wireless-drivers trees.
>
> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
> that one too?

I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
Michael or Rafal :)

Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: [PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 16 January 2016 at 13:10, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>
>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>>> wireless-drivers trees.
>>
>> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
>> that one too?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
> Michael or Rafal :)
>
> Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
> linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.

It was already sent once and Acked by Michael:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7543191/

The problem was not cc-ing linux-wireless so it wasn't picked by the
linux-wireless patchwork.

-- 
Rafał

Re: [PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 16 January 2016 at 13:10, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>
>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>>> wireless-drivers trees.
>>
>> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
>> that one too?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
> Michael or Rafal :)
>
> Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
> linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.

It was already sent once and Acked by Michael:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7543191/

The problem was not cc-ing linux-wireless so it wasn't picked by the
linux-wireless patchwork.

-- 
Rafał

[PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 16 January 2016 at 13:10, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>
>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>>> wireless-drivers trees.
>>
>> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
>> that one too?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
> Michael or Rafal :)
>
> Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
> linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.

It was already sent once and Acked by Michael:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7543191/

The problem was not cc-ing linux-wireless so it wasn't picked by the
linux-wireless patchwork.

-- 
Rafa?

Re: [PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:

> On 16 January 2016 at 13:10, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>>
>>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>>>> wireless-drivers trees.
>>>
>>> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
>>> that one too?
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
>> Michael or Rafal :)
>>
>> Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
>> linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.
>
> It was already sent once and Acked by Michael:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7543191/
>
> The problem was not cc-ing linux-wireless so it wasn't picked by the
> linux-wireless patchwork.

Ah, that's why I missed it. I only follow patchwork, I basically ignore
patches which are sent via email. Arnd, can you please resend the patch
and CC linux-wireless? Sorry for the trouble.

To avoid this in the future I think we should replace netdev with
linux-wireless in the MAINTAINERS entry:

SONICS SILICON BACKPLANE DRIVER (SSB)
M:      Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
L:      netdev@vger.kernel.org
S:      Maintained
F:      drivers/ssb/
F:      include/linux/ssb/

Are people ok with that? Patches welcome :)

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: [PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:

> On 16 January 2016 at 13:10, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>>
>>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>>>> wireless-drivers trees.
>>>
>>> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
>>> that one too?
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
>> Michael or Rafal :)
>>
>> Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
>> linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.
>
> It was already sent once and Acked by Michael:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7543191/
>
> The problem was not cc-ing linux-wireless so it wasn't picked by the
> linux-wireless patchwork.

Ah, that's why I missed it. I only follow patchwork, I basically ignore
patches which are sent via email. Arnd, can you please resend the patch
and CC linux-wireless? Sorry for the trouble.

To avoid this in the future I think we should replace netdev with
linux-wireless in the MAINTAINERS entry:

SONICS SILICON BACKPLANE DRIVER (SSB)
M:      Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
L:      netdev@vger.kernel.org
S:      Maintained
F:      drivers/ssb/
F:      include/linux/ssb/

Are people ok with that? Patches welcome :)

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: [PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:

> On 16 January 2016 at 13:10, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>>
>>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>>>> wireless-drivers trees.
>>>
>>> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
>>> that one too?
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
>> Michael or Rafal :)
>>
>> Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
>> linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.
>
> It was already sent once and Acked by Michael:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7543191/
>
> The problem was not cc-ing linux-wireless so it wasn't picked by the
> linux-wireless patchwork.

Ah, that's why I missed it. I only follow patchwork, I basically ignore
patches which are sent via email. Arnd, can you please resend the patch
and CC linux-wireless? Sorry for the trouble.

To avoid this in the future I think we should replace netdev with
linux-wireless in the MAINTAINERS entry:

SONICS SILICON BACKPLANE DRIVER (SSB)
M:      Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
L:      netdev@vger.kernel.org
S:      Maintained
F:      drivers/ssb/
F:      include/linux/ssb/

Are people ok with that? Patches welcome :)

-- 
Kalle Valo

[PATCH, RESEND] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Rafa? Mi?ecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:

> On 16 January 2016 at 13:10, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:
>>
>>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 08:46:29 Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>> I can take it. For historical reasons ssb patches go through my
>>>> wireless-drivers trees.
>>>
>>> I found this in my backlog, and I believe it still applies. Can you take
>>> that one too?
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean here, I can take any ssb patch if it's ok for
>> Michael or Rafal :)
>>
>> Just please submit the patch properly (with S-o-B line) and CC
>> linux-wireless so that it goes to patchwork.
>
> It was already sent once and Acked by Michael:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7543191/
>
> The problem was not cc-ing linux-wireless so it wasn't picked by the
> linux-wireless patchwork.

Ah, that's why I missed it. I only follow patchwork, I basically ignore
patches which are sent via email. Arnd, can you please resend the patch
and CC linux-wireless? Sorry for the trouble.

To avoid this in the future I think we should replace netdev with
linux-wireless in the MAINTAINERS entry:

SONICS SILICON BACKPLANE DRIVER (SSB)
M:      Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
L:      netdev at vger.kernel.org
S:      Maintained
F:      drivers/ssb/
F:      include/linux/ssb/

Are people ok with that? Patches welcome :)

-- 
Kalle Valo

ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Michael Büsch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 613 bytes --]

ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.

Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

---

Index: linux/MAINTAINERS
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/MAINTAINERS
+++ linux/MAINTAINERS
@@ -10036,7 +10036,7 @@ F:	drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/sonic.*
 
 SONICS SILICON BACKPLANE DRIVER (SSB)
 M:	Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
-L:	netdev@vger.kernel.org
+L:	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
 S:	Maintained
 F:	drivers/ssb/
 F:	include/linux/ssb/


-- 
Michael

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 18 January 2016 at 17:53, Michael Büsch <m@bues.ch> wrote:
> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
> Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.

Thanks Michael

Re: ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 18 January 2016 at 17:53, Michael Büsch <m@bues.ch> wrote:
> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
> Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.

Thanks Michael

ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 18 January 2016 at 17:53, Michael B?sch <m@bues.ch> wrote:
> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
> Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.

Thanks Michael

[PATCH, RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Arnd Bergmann]

The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
front-end, but that results in a warning:

drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]

This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
place.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
---
Resent to linux-wireless as requested

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/main.c b/drivers/ssb/main.c
index cde5ff7529eb..d1a750760cf3 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/main.c
+++ b/drivers/ssb/main.c
@@ -613,9 +613,10 @@ out:
 	return err;
 }
 
-static int ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
-			    ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
-			    unsigned long baseaddr)
+static int __maybe_unused
+ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
+		 ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
+		 unsigned long baseaddr)
 {
 	int err;
 

[PATCH, RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Arnd Bergmann]

The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
front-end, but that results in a warning:

drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]

This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
place.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
---
Resent to linux-wireless as requested

diff --git a/drivers/ssb/main.c b/drivers/ssb/main.c
index cde5ff7529eb..d1a750760cf3 100644
--- a/drivers/ssb/main.c
+++ b/drivers/ssb/main.c
@@ -613,9 +613,10 @@ out:
 	return err;
 }
 
-static int ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
-			    ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
-			    unsigned long baseaddr)
+static int __maybe_unused
+ssb_bus_register(struct ssb_bus *bus,
+		 ssb_invariants_func_t get_invariants,
+		 unsigned long baseaddr)
 {
 	int err;
 

Re: [PATCH, RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
> ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
> front-end, but that results in a warning:
>
> drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>
> This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
> shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
> any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
> without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
> place.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
> Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
> ---
> Resent to linux-wireless as requested

Thanks, and sorry for the hassle. I'm planning to push this to 4.5.

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: [PATCH, RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org> writes:

> The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
> ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
> front-end, but that results in a warning:
>
> drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>
> This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
> shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
> any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
> without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
> place.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
> Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
> Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
> ---
> Resent to linux-wireless as requested

Thanks, and sorry for the hassle. I'm planning to push this to 4.5.

-- 
Kalle Valo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH, RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> writes:

> The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
> ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
> front-end, but that results in a warning:
>
> drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>
> This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
> shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
> any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
> without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
> place.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
> Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>
> ---
> Resent to linux-wireless as requested

Thanks, and sorry for the hassle. I'm planning to push this to 4.5.

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Kalle Valo]

Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:

> On 18 January 2016 at 17:53, Michael Büsch <m@bues.ch> wrote:
>
>> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree. Set the list to
>> linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.
>
> Thanks Michael

Thanks from me also. I'm planning to send this to 4.5.

-- 
Kalle Valo

ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Kalle Valo]

Rafa? Mi?ecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:

> On 18 January 2016 at 17:53, Michael B?sch <m@bues.ch> wrote:
>
>> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree. Set the list to
>> linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.
>
> Thanks Michael

Thanks from me also. I'm planning to send this to 4.5.

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Kalle Valo]

> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
> Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo

Re: ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Kalle Valo]

> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
> Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo

Re: ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
> Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo

ssb: Set linux-wireless as MAINTAINERS list

[Kalle Valo]

> ssb patches go through the linux-wireless tree.
> Set the list to linux-wireless, so linux-wireless patchwork can catch the patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo

Re: [RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

> The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
> ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
> front-end, but that results in a warning:
> 
> drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> 
> This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
> shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
> any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
> without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
> place.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
> Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo

Re: [RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

> The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
> ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
> front-end, but that results in a warning:
> 
> drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> 
> This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
> shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
> any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
> without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
> place.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
> Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo

Re: [RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

> The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
> ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
> front-end, but that results in a warning:
> 
> drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> 
> This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
> shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
> any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
> without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
> place.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
> Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo

[RESEND^2] ssb: mark ssb_bus_register as __maybe_unused

[Kalle Valo]

> The SoC variant of the ssb code is now optional like the other
> ones, which means we can build the framwork without any
> front-end, but that results in a warning:
> 
> drivers/ssb/main.c:616:12: warning: 'ssb_bus_register' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> 
> This annotates the ssb_bus_register function as __maybe_unused to
> shut up the warning. A configuration like this will not work on
> any hardware of course, but we still want this to silently build
> without warnings if the configuration is allowed in the first
> place.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 845da6e58e19 ("ssb: add Kconfig entry for compiling SoC related code")
> Acked-by: Michael Buesch <m@bues.ch>

Thanks, applied to wireless-drivers.git.

Kalle Valo