Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 17 (pinctrl-msm)

From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
To: Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	"linux-next@vger.kernel.org" <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 17 (pinctrl-msm)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 10:46:49 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <530B9399.5010909@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140224184120.GB18563@joshc.qualcomm.com>

On 02/24/2014 10:41 AM, Josh Cartwright wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:14:45AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 02/24/2014 09:46 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>> On Mon 24 Feb 06:46 PST 2014, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 02/16/2014 10:23 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>>> ERROR: "handle_bad_irq" [drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-msm.ko] undefined!
>>>>
>>>> Weird, Björn do you know what may be causing this?
>>>
>>> I include linux/irq.h to get hold of handle_bad_irq() and as far as I can see
>>> there are no changes related to that in linux-next.
>>>
>>> Do we know if the build still fails? Or if something changed?
>>>
>>>
>>> Please let me know if I should pull down the -next tree and try to reproduce
>>> this.
>>
>> I guess that you get off free on this one since I didn't post the failing
>> .config file and I have already deleted it.
>>
>> I'm trying to reproduce it now but it's slow going.  I'll let you know if
>> I get it to fail again.
> 
> Without too much effort, I can get this to fail just by making
> CONFIG_PINCTRL_MSM=m.  handle_bad_irq isn't marked EXPORT_SYMBOL*, so
> hence the warning.

Yes, I was just about to write the same thing.

> Whether or not this is intentional is not clear.  Do we support modules
> installing chained irq handlers?

Thomas?

> For now, the patch below just makes this driver 'bool' instead of
> 'tristate'.

What does pinctrl have against using loadable modules in many cases?

>   Josh
> 
> --8<--
> Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: msm: make PINCTRL_MSM bool instead of tristate
> 
> Modular builds of pinctrl-msm break due to handle_bad_irq being
> unexported for module use.  For now, make PINCTRL_MSM 'bool'.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig b/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig
> index be361b7..1e4e693 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/Kconfig
> @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ config PINCTRL_IMX28
>  	select PINCTRL_MXS
>  
>  config PINCTRL_MSM
> -	tristate
> +	bool
>  	select PINMUX
>  	select PINCONF
>  	select GENERIC_PINCONF
> 

-- 
~Randy