From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753181AbcGYO4L (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2016 10:56:11 -0400 Received: from 216-12-86-13.cv.mvl.ntelos.net ([216.12.86.13]:59194 "EHLO brightrain.aerifal.cx" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753084AbcGYO4F (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2016 10:56:05 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 10:53:37 -0400 From: Rich Felker To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mark Brown , Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the tip tree Message-ID: <20160725145337.GT15995@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20160724153233.49f1574d@canb.auug.org.au> <57961014.7030902@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57961014.7030902@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 03:11:48PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 07/25/2016 09:16 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Jul 2016, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) > >> produced this warning: > >> > >> In file included from include/linux/clocksource.h:18:0, > >> from include/linux/clockchips.h:13, > >> from drivers/clocksource/jcore-pit.c:14: > >> include/linux/of.h:1004:20: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast > >> .data = (fn == (fn_type)NULL) ? fn : fn } > >> ^ > >> include/linux/of.h:1020:3: note: in expansion of macro '_OF_DECLARE' > >> _OF_DECLARE(table, name, compat, fn, of_init_fn_1_ret) > >> ^ > >> include/linux/clocksource.h:247:2: note: in expansion of macro 'OF_DECLARE_1_RET' > >> OF_DECLARE_1_RET(clksrc, name, compat, fn) > >> ^ > >> drivers/clocksource/jcore-pit.c:277:1: note: in expansion of macro 'CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE' > >> CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(jcore_pit, "jcore,pit", jcore_pit_init); > >> ^ > >> > >> Introduced by commits > >> > >> b7c4db861683 ("clocksource/drivers/clksrc-probe: Introduce init functions with return code") > >> 177cf6e52b0a ("clocksources: Switch back to the clksrc table") > >> > >> interacting with commit > >> > >> e0aa0655c60b ("clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver") > >> > >> from the sh tree. > > > > And why is that driver coming through the superh tree and not through the > > clocksource maintainers? It's not only based on an old interface it's probably > > unreviewed as well ... > > Rich, > > why are these changes in linux-next ? > > Except I am missing something, I don't see a new version sent for review > on the mailing list. The interrupt controller driver is almost empty as > stated by Marc Zyngier and there is no explanation / discussion about it. > > I don't know the goal of adding those patches in linux-next via your > tree, may be you misunderstood how linux-next works and you should > remove them. But if the purpose was to merge the patches, I remind you > that being an arch maintainer does not give you the right to apply any > patches, everywhere, at all cost, without review, because you want them > in, you must follow the process, otherwise you take the risk to upset a > lot of people and to be kicked out. If this is upsetting people I can remove them. Last time I got feedback from at least one (driver) subsystem maintainer that (if I understood it correctly) indicated they would like to have seen the patch in linux-next without problems before upstreaming it through their tree. That was my motivation for including it here. I'm not trying to bypass other maintainers to push patches upstream and I can remove all non-arch/sh stuff from for-next if that would be better. Rich