* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree
@ 2013-01-18 3:03 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-18 7:57 ` [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB Shawn Guo
2013-01-18 8:02 ` linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree Shawn Guo
0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-01-18 3:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Shawn Guo
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 854 bytes --]
Hi Linus,
After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpio/devres.c:51:5: error: redefinition of 'devm_gpio_request'
include/linux/gpio.h:97:19: note: previous definition of 'devm_gpio_request' was here
drivers/gpio/devres.c:80:5: error: redefinition of 'devm_gpio_request_one'
include/linux/gpio.h:109:19: note: previous definition of 'devm_gpio_request_one' was here
drivers/gpio/devres.c:113:6: error: redefinition of 'devm_gpio_free'
include/linux/gpio.h:128:20: note: previous definition of 'devm_gpio_free' was here
Presumably caused by commit d39cd0301255 ("gpio: devm_gpio_* support
should not depend on GPIOLIB").
I have used the version of the gpio-lw tree from next-20130117 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread* [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-01-18 3:03 linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-01-18 7:57 ` Shawn Guo 2013-01-18 22:33 ` Linus Walleij 2013-01-18 8:02 ` linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree Shawn Guo 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Shawn Guo @ 2013-01-18 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel, Shawn Guo Some architectures (e.g. blackfin) provide gpio API without requiring GPIOLIB support (ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB). devm_gpio_* functions should also work for these architectures, since they do not really depend on GPIOLIB. Add a new option GPIO_DEVRES (enabled by default) to control the build of devres.c. It also removes the empty version of devm_gpio_* functions for !GENERIC_GPIO build from linux/gpio.h, and moves the function declarations from asm-generic/gpio.h into linux/gpio.h. Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> --- drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 3 +++ drivers/gpio/Makefile | 3 ++- include/asm-generic/gpio.h | 6 ------ include/linux/gpio.h | 28 ++++++++-------------------- 4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig index 682de75..d972932 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/gpio/Kconfig @@ -30,6 +30,9 @@ config ARCH_REQUIRE_GPIOLIB Selecting this from the architecture code will cause the gpiolib code to always get built in. +config GPIO_DEVRES + def_bool y + depends on HAS_IOMEM menuconfig GPIOLIB diff --git a/drivers/gpio/Makefile b/drivers/gpio/Makefile index c5aebd0..36ca605 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/Makefile +++ b/drivers/gpio/Makefile @@ -2,7 +2,8 @@ ccflags-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO) += -DDEBUG -obj-$(CONFIG_GPIOLIB) += gpiolib.o devres.o +obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_DEVRES) += devres.o +obj-$(CONFIG_GPIOLIB) += gpiolib.o obj-$(CONFIG_OF_GPIO) += gpiolib-of.o obj-$(CONFIG_GPIO_ACPI) += gpiolib-acpi.o diff --git a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h index 2341014..45b8916 100644 --- a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h +++ b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h @@ -192,12 +192,6 @@ extern int gpio_request_one(unsigned gpio, unsigned long flags, const char *labe extern int gpio_request_array(const struct gpio *array, size_t num); extern void gpio_free_array(const struct gpio *array, size_t num); -/* bindings for managed devices that want to request gpios */ -int devm_gpio_request(struct device *dev, unsigned gpio, const char *label); -int devm_gpio_request_one(struct device *dev, unsigned gpio, - unsigned long flags, const char *label); -void devm_gpio_free(struct device *dev, unsigned int gpio); - #ifdef CONFIG_GPIO_SYSFS /* diff --git a/include/linux/gpio.h b/include/linux/gpio.h index bfe6656..f6c7ae3 100644 --- a/include/linux/gpio.h +++ b/include/linux/gpio.h @@ -94,24 +94,12 @@ static inline int gpio_request(unsigned gpio, const char *label) return -ENOSYS; } -static inline int devm_gpio_request(struct device *dev, unsigned gpio, - const char *label) -{ - return -ENOSYS; -} - static inline int gpio_request_one(unsigned gpio, unsigned long flags, const char *label) { return -ENOSYS; } -static inline int devm_gpio_request_one(struct device *dev, unsigned gpio, - unsigned long flags, const char *label) -{ - return -ENOSYS; -} - static inline int gpio_request_array(const struct gpio *array, size_t num) { return -ENOSYS; @@ -125,14 +113,6 @@ static inline void gpio_free(unsigned gpio) WARN_ON(1); } -static inline void devm_gpio_free(struct device *dev, unsigned gpio) -{ - might_sleep(); - - /* GPIO can never have been requested */ - WARN_ON(1); -} - static inline void gpio_free_array(const struct gpio *array, size_t num) { might_sleep(); @@ -248,4 +228,12 @@ gpiochip_remove_pin_ranges(struct gpio_chip *chip) #endif /* ! CONFIG_GENERIC_GPIO */ +struct device; + +/* bindings for managed devices that want to request gpios */ +int devm_gpio_request(struct device *dev, unsigned gpio, const char *label); +int devm_gpio_request_one(struct device *dev, unsigned gpio, + unsigned long flags, const char *label); +void devm_gpio_free(struct device *dev, unsigned int gpio); + #endif /* __LINUX_GPIO_H */ -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-01-18 7:57 ` [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB Shawn Guo @ 2013-01-18 22:33 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-10 4:46 ` Max Filippov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2013-01-18 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Shawn Guo; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: > Some architectures (e.g. blackfin) provide gpio API without requiring > GPIOLIB support (ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB). devm_gpio_* functions > should also work for these architectures, since they do not really > depend on GPIOLIB. > > Add a new option GPIO_DEVRES (enabled by default) to control the build > of devres.c. It also removes the empty version of devm_gpio_* > functions for !GENERIC_GPIO build from linux/gpio.h, and moves the > function declarations from asm-generic/gpio.h into linux/gpio.h. > > Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> OK I removed the old version of the patch and pushed this instead. Thanks! Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-01-18 22:33 ` Linus Walleij @ 2013-02-10 4:46 ` Max Filippov 2013-02-11 14:13 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-13 13:37 ` Shawn Guo 0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Max Filippov @ 2013-02-10 4:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: Shawn Guo, Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: > >> Some architectures (e.g. blackfin) provide gpio API without requiring >> GPIOLIB support (ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB). devm_gpio_* functions >> should also work for these architectures, since they do not really >> depend on GPIOLIB. >> >> Add a new option GPIO_DEVRES (enabled by default) to control the build >> of devres.c. It also removes the empty version of devm_gpio_* >> functions for !GENERIC_GPIO build from linux/gpio.h, and moves the >> function declarations from asm-generic/gpio.h into linux/gpio.h. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> > > OK I removed the old version of the patch and pushed this instead. Hi, this patch causes the following errors for xtensa defconfig build: include/asm-generic/gpio.h:265:2: error: implicit declaration of function '__gpio_get_value' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] include/asm-generic/gpio.h:271:2: error: implicit declaration of function '__gpio_set_value' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] include/linux/gpio.h:60:90: error: redefinition of 'gpio_cansleep' include/linux/gpio.h:62:2: error: implicit declaration of function '__gpio_cansleep' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] include/linux/gpio.h:67:2: error: implicit declaration of function '__gpio_to_irq' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] drivers/gpio/devres.c:26:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'gpio_free' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] drivers/gpio/devres.c:60:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'gpio_request' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] drivers/gpio/devres.c:90:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'gpio_request_one' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] -- Thanks. -- Max ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-02-10 4:46 ` Max Filippov @ 2013-02-11 14:13 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-11 16:50 ` Max Filippov 2013-02-11 20:23 ` Stephen Rothwell 2013-02-13 13:37 ` Shawn Guo 1 sibling, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2013-02-11 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Max Filippov; +Cc: Shawn Guo, Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: >> >>> Some architectures (e.g. blackfin) provide gpio API without requiring >>> GPIOLIB support (ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB). devm_gpio_* functions >>> should also work for these architectures, since they do not really >>> depend on GPIOLIB. >>> >>> Add a new option GPIO_DEVRES (enabled by default) to control the build >>> of devres.c. It also removes the empty version of devm_gpio_* >>> functions for !GENERIC_GPIO build from linux/gpio.h, and moves the >>> function declarations from asm-generic/gpio.h into linux/gpio.h. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> >> >> OK I removed the old version of the patch and pushed this instead. > > Hi, > > this patch causes the following errors for xtensa defconfig build: Max, can you point us to an xtensa cross-compiler so we can figure out where the problem is? Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-02-11 14:13 ` Linus Walleij @ 2013-02-11 16:50 ` Max Filippov 2013-02-12 12:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-11 20:23 ` Stephen Rothwell 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Max Filippov @ 2013-02-11 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: Shawn Guo, Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Some architectures (e.g. blackfin) provide gpio API without requiring >>>> GPIOLIB support (ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB). devm_gpio_* functions >>>> should also work for these architectures, since they do not really >>>> depend on GPIOLIB. >>>> >>>> Add a new option GPIO_DEVRES (enabled by default) to control the build >>>> of devres.c. It also removes the empty version of devm_gpio_* >>>> functions for !GENERIC_GPIO build from linux/gpio.h, and moves the >>>> function declarations from asm-generic/gpio.h into linux/gpio.h. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> >>> >>> OK I removed the old version of the patch and pushed this instead. >> >> Hi, >> >> this patch causes the following errors for xtensa defconfig build: > > Max, can you point us to an xtensa cross-compiler so we can > figure out where the problem is? Hi Linus, I use the following scripts to build cross-compiler for xtensa: https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/xtensa-toolchain-build You'd need to download binutils/gcc/gdb source tarballs with versions specified in config and then run $ ./prepare.sh fsf && ./fixup-gdb.sh && ./build.sh fsf FWIW I see that the issue is caused by building drivers/gpio/devres.c with CONFIG_GPIOLIB=n. Should I just turn GPIO_DEVRES off too? -- Thanks. -- Max ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-02-11 16:50 ` Max Filippov @ 2013-02-12 12:35 ` Linus Walleij 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2013-02-12 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Max Filippov; +Cc: Shawn Guo, Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com> wrote: > FWIW I see that the issue is caused by building drivers/gpio/devres.c > with CONFIG_GPIOLIB=n. Should I just turn GPIO_DEVRES off too? Hm. Shawn just added: +config GPIO_DEVRES + def_bool y + depends on HAS_IOMEM Can you please patch the last line like so: depends on (HAS_IOMEM && GPIOLIB) I think that's the actual problem... Maybe also move this config option below the GPIOLIB entry. Or move it under the #if GPIOLIB even. Can you send a patch that works for you? Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-02-11 14:13 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-11 16:50 ` Max Filippov @ 2013-02-11 20:23 ` Stephen Rothwell 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-02-11 20:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: Max Filippov, Shawn Guo, linux-next, linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 391 bytes --] Hi Linus, On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:13:20 +0100 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > > Max, can you point us to an xtensa cross-compiler so we can > figure out where the problem is? Prebuilt toolchains suitable for building the kernel can be found at http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/ . -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB 2013-02-10 4:46 ` Max Filippov 2013-02-11 14:13 ` Linus Walleij @ 2013-02-13 13:37 ` Shawn Guo 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Shawn Guo @ 2013-02-13 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Max Filippov; +Cc: Linus Walleij, Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel Sorry for the late response due to Chinese New Year Holidays here. On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:46:30AM +0300, Max Filippov wrote: > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:33 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: > > > >> Some architectures (e.g. blackfin) provide gpio API without requiring > >> GPIOLIB support (ARCH_WANT_OPTIONAL_GPIOLIB). devm_gpio_* functions > >> should also work for these architectures, since they do not really > >> depend on GPIOLIB. > >> > >> Add a new option GPIO_DEVRES (enabled by default) to control the build > >> of devres.c. It also removes the empty version of devm_gpio_* > >> functions for !GENERIC_GPIO build from linux/gpio.h, and moves the > >> function declarations from asm-generic/gpio.h into linux/gpio.h. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> > > > > OK I removed the old version of the patch and pushed this instead. > > Hi, > > this patch causes the following errors for xtensa defconfig build: > I assume this is a build of arch/xtensa/common_defconfig. > include/asm-generic/gpio.h:265:2: error: implicit declaration of > function '__gpio_get_value' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > include/asm-generic/gpio.h:271:2: error: implicit declaration of > function '__gpio_set_value' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > include/linux/gpio.h:60:90: error: redefinition of 'gpio_cansleep' > include/linux/gpio.h:62:2: error: implicit declaration of function > '__gpio_cansleep' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > include/linux/gpio.h:67:2: error: implicit declaration of function > '__gpio_to_irq' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > drivers/gpio/devres.c:26:2: error: implicit declaration of function > 'gpio_free' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > drivers/gpio/devres.c:60:2: error: implicit declaration of function > 'gpio_request' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > drivers/gpio/devres.c:90:2: error: implicit declaration of function > 'gpio_request_one' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > I'm not sure why GENERIC_GPIO is needed for this build at all. At least, with the change below, everything seems building fine with common_defconfig. Shawn diff --git a/arch/xtensa/Kconfig b/arch/xtensa/Kconfig index 13358e1..cfc41f3 100644 --- a/arch/xtensa/Kconfig +++ b/arch/xtensa/Kconfig @@ -31,9 +31,6 @@ config RWSEM_XCHGADD_ALGORITHM config GENERIC_HWEIGHT def_bool y -config GENERIC_GPIO - def_bool y - config ARCH_HAS_ILOG2_U32 def_bool n ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2013-01-18 3:03 linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree Stephen Rothwell 2013-01-18 7:57 ` [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB Shawn Guo @ 2013-01-18 8:02 ` Shawn Guo 2013-01-18 23:40 ` Stephen Rothwell 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Shawn Guo @ 2013-01-18 8:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Linus Walleij, linux-next, linux-kernel On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 02:03:46PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Linus, > > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this: > My bad, sorry for that. I just sent a v2 in reply to this message for fixing the error. I spent some time trying to install a ppc64 toolchain for testing, but unfortunately with on luck. So Stephen, I have to rely on linux-next to give it a test again. Thanks. Shawn > drivers/gpio/devres.c:51:5: error: redefinition of 'devm_gpio_request' > include/linux/gpio.h:97:19: note: previous definition of 'devm_gpio_request' was here > drivers/gpio/devres.c:80:5: error: redefinition of 'devm_gpio_request_one' > include/linux/gpio.h:109:19: note: previous definition of 'devm_gpio_request_one' was here > drivers/gpio/devres.c:113:6: error: redefinition of 'devm_gpio_free' > include/linux/gpio.h:128:20: note: previous definition of 'devm_gpio_free' was here > > Presumably caused by commit d39cd0301255 ("gpio: devm_gpio_* support > should not depend on GPIOLIB"). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2013-01-18 8:02 ` linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree Shawn Guo @ 2013-01-18 23:40 ` Stephen Rothwell 2013-01-21 6:20 ` Shawn Guo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-01-18 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Shawn Guo; +Cc: Linus Walleij, linux-next, linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 692 bytes --] Hi Shawn, On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:02:13 +0800 Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: > > My bad, sorry for that. I just sent a v2 in reply to this message > for fixing the error. I spent some time trying to install a ppc64 > toolchain for testing, but unfortunately with on luck. So Stephen, > I have to rely on linux-next to give it a test again. Thanks. Cross compilers suitable for building kernels are available at http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/ . However, in this case, you probably just need to get the right combination of CONFIG options. I will give it a spin early next week. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2013-01-18 23:40 ` Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-01-21 6:20 ` Shawn Guo 2013-01-21 5:53 ` Stephen Rothwell 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Shawn Guo @ 2013-01-21 6:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Linus Walleij, linux-next, linux-kernel On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:40:45AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Shawn, > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:02:13 +0800 Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > My bad, sorry for that. I just sent a v2 in reply to this message > > for fixing the error. I spent some time trying to install a ppc64 > > toolchain for testing, but unfortunately with on luck. So Stephen, > > I have to rely on linux-next to give it a test again. Thanks. > > Cross compilers suitable for building kernels are available at > http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/ . Thanks for the link, Stephen. I installed the compiler and verified that the v2 fixes the error. Shawn ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2013-01-21 6:20 ` Shawn Guo @ 2013-01-21 5:53 ` Stephen Rothwell 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-01-21 5:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Shawn Guo; +Cc: Linus Walleij, linux-next, linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 864 bytes --] Hi Shawn, On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:20:13 +0800 Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:40:45AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:02:13 +0800 Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > My bad, sorry for that. I just sent a v2 in reply to this message > > > for fixing the error. I spent some time trying to install a ppc64 > > > toolchain for testing, but unfortunately with on luck. So Stephen, > > > I have to rely on linux-next to give it a test again. Thanks. > > > > Cross compilers suitable for building kernels are available at > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/ . > > Thanks for the link, Stephen. I installed the compiler and verified > that the v2 fixes the error. Thanks. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree @ 2012-07-06 6:14 Stephen Rothwell 2012-07-06 7:01 ` Linus Walleij 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2012-07-06 6:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Kuninori Morimoto [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 381 bytes --] Hi Linus, After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this: ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! I have dropped the gpio-lw tree for today. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-07-06 6:14 Stephen Rothwell @ 2012-07-06 7:01 ` Linus Walleij 2012-07-06 8:55 ` Kuninori Morimoto 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2012-07-06 7:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Kuninori Morimoto On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 8:14 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > allmodconfig) failed like this: > > ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! Thanks, I've dropped the offending patch, Kuninori can you look into this and provide a new patch? It's the second patch from your patch set. Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-07-06 7:01 ` Linus Walleij @ 2012-07-06 8:55 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-07-08 19:14 ` Linus Walleij 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-07-06 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel Dear Linus > > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > > allmodconfig) failed like this: > > > > ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > > ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > > Thanks, I've dropped the offending patch, Kuninori can you look into this and > provide a new patch? It's the second patch from your patch set. OK. I will, but it will be next week. And could you please show me where is your repository/branch ? Best regards -- Kuninori Morimoto ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-07-06 8:55 ` Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-07-08 19:14 ` Linus Walleij 2012-07-09 2:04 ` Kuninori Morimoto 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2012-07-08 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kuninori Morimoto; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> wrote: > > Dear Linus > >> > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 >> > allmodconfig) failed like this: >> > >> > ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! >> > ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! >> >> Thanks, I've dropped the offending patch, Kuninori can you look into this and >> provide a new patch? It's the second patch from your patch set. > > OK. I will, but it will be next week. > And could you please show me where is your repository/branch ? http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-gpio.git;a=summary branch devel/for-next Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-07-08 19:14 ` Linus Walleij @ 2012-07-09 2:04 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-07-09 20:34 ` Linus Walleij 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-07-09 2:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Gleixner, Stephen Rothwell, Linus Walleij Cc: Kuninori Morimoto, linux-kernel, linux-next Hi Linus Walleij, Stephen, and Thomas > >> > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > >> > allmodconfig) failed like this: > >> > > >> > ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > >> > ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > >> > >> Thanks, I've dropped the offending patch, Kuninori can you look into this and > >> provide a new patch? It's the second patch from your patch set. > > > > OK. I will, but it will be next week. > > And could you please show me where is your repository/branch ? > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-gpio.git;a=summary > branch devel/for-next In my check, these are export symbol issue. I think above 2 function/struct were not exported for module. Is it poosible to solve this issue by these patches ? Kuninori Morimoto (2): genirq: export irq_set_chip_and_handler_name() genirq: export dummy_irq_chip kernel/irq/chip.c | 1 + kernel/irq/dummychip.c | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-07-09 2:04 ` Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-07-09 20:34 ` Linus Walleij 2012-07-24 3:56 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-08-22 5:03 ` Kuninori Morimoto 0 siblings, 2 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2012-07-09 20:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kuninori Morimoto Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Stephen Rothwell, Kuninori Morimoto, linux-kernel, linux-next On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> wrote: > Hi Linus Walleij, Stephen, and Thomas > >> >> > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 >> >> > allmodconfig) failed like this: >> >> > >> >> > ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! >> >> > ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! >> >> >> >> Thanks, I've dropped the offending patch, Kuninori can you look into this and >> >> provide a new patch? It's the second patch from your patch set. >> > >> > OK. I will, but it will be next week. >> > And could you please show me where is your repository/branch ? >> >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-gpio.git;a=summary >> branch devel/for-next > > In my check, these are export symbol issue. > I think above 2 function/struct were not exported for module. > > Is it poosible to solve this issue by these patches ? Hm Thomas has to answer to that (and merge the patches, if he likes them). Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-07-09 20:34 ` Linus Walleij @ 2012-07-24 3:56 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-08-22 5:03 ` Kuninori Morimoto 1 sibling, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-07-24 3:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Stephen Rothwell, Kuninori Morimoto, linux-kernel, linux-next Hi Thomas Could you please teach me current status of these patches ? Kuninori Morimoto (2): genirq: export irq_set_chip_and_handler_name() genirq: export dummy_irq_chip At Mon, 9 Jul 2012 22:34:23 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Kuninori Morimoto > <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> wrote: > > > Hi Linus Walleij, Stephen, and Thomas > > > >> >> > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > >> >> > allmodconfig) failed like this: > >> >> > > >> >> > ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > >> >> > ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, I've dropped the offending patch, Kuninori can you look into this and > >> >> provide a new patch? It's the second patch from your patch set. > >> > > >> > OK. I will, but it will be next week. > >> > And could you please show me where is your repository/branch ? > >> > >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-gpio.git;a=summary > >> branch devel/for-next > > > > In my check, these are export symbol issue. > > I think above 2 function/struct were not exported for module. > > > > Is it poosible to solve this issue by these patches ? > > Hm Thomas has to answer to that (and merge the patches, if he > likes them). > > Yours, > Linus Walleij Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-07-09 20:34 ` Linus Walleij 2012-07-24 3:56 ` Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-08-22 5:03 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-08-23 21:43 ` Linus Walleij 1 sibling, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-08-22 5:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Stephen Rothwell, Kuninori Morimoto, linux-kernel, linux-next Hi Linus W > >> >> > After merging the gpio-lw tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > >> >> > allmodconfig) failed like this: > >> >> > > >> >> > ERROR: "irq_set_chip_and_handler_name" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > >> >> > ERROR: "dummy_irq_chip" [drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.ko] undefined! > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, I've dropped the offending patch, Kuninori can you look into this and > >> >> provide a new patch? It's the second patch from your patch set. > >> > > >> > OK. I will, but it will be next week. > >> > And could you please show me where is your repository/branch ? > >> > >> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-gpio.git;a=summary > >> branch devel/for-next > > > > In my check, these are export symbol issue. > > I think above 2 function/struct were not exported for module. > > > > Is it poosible to solve this issue by these patches ? > > Hm Thomas has to answer to that (and merge the patches, if he > likes them). Now, these fixup patches were accepted. http://git.kernel.org/tip/17d83127d4c2b322dd8f217e0ac08c66eb403779 http://git.kernel.org/tip/b3ae66f209e8929db62b5a5f874ab2cdcf5ef1d4 Could you please re-check this dropped patch ? it was [PATCH 2/2 v3][resend] gpio: pcf857x: enable gpio_to_irq() support (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/14/654) I can resend this patch if you want Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-08-22 5:03 ` Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-08-23 21:43 ` Linus Walleij 2012-08-27 1:16 ` Kuninori Morimoto 0 siblings, 1 reply; 23+ messages in thread From: Linus Walleij @ 2012-08-23 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kuninori Morimoto Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Stephen Rothwell, Kuninori Morimoto, linux-kernel, linux-next On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> wrote: > Now, these fixup patches were accepted. > http://git.kernel.org/tip/17d83127d4c2b322dd8f217e0ac08c66eb403779 > http://git.kernel.org/tip/b3ae66f209e8929db62b5a5f874ab2cdcf5ef1d4 > > Could you please re-check this dropped patch ? Yes! I've applied it. Check that it lands nicely in -next. Yours, Linus Walleij ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree 2012-08-23 21:43 ` Linus Walleij @ 2012-08-27 1:16 ` Kuninori Morimoto 0 siblings, 0 replies; 23+ messages in thread From: Kuninori Morimoto @ 2012-08-27 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Linus Walleij Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Stephen Rothwell, Kuninori Morimoto, linux-kernel, linux-next Hi Linus W > > Now, these fixup patches were accepted. > > http://git.kernel.org/tip/17d83127d4c2b322dd8f217e0ac08c66eb403779 > > http://git.kernel.org/tip/b3ae66f209e8929db62b5a5f874ab2cdcf5ef1d4 > > > > Could you please re-check this dropped patch ? > > Yes! I've applied it. Check that it lands nicely in -next. Thank you ! It works on my board. Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 23+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-13 13:38 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 23+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-01-18 3:03 linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree Stephen Rothwell 2013-01-18 7:57 ` [PATCH v2] gpio: devm_gpio_* support should not depend on GPIOLIB Shawn Guo 2013-01-18 22:33 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-10 4:46 ` Max Filippov 2013-02-11 14:13 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-11 16:50 ` Max Filippov 2013-02-12 12:35 ` Linus Walleij 2013-02-11 20:23 ` Stephen Rothwell 2013-02-13 13:37 ` Shawn Guo 2013-01-18 8:02 ` linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-lw tree Shawn Guo 2013-01-18 23:40 ` Stephen Rothwell 2013-01-21 6:20 ` Shawn Guo 2013-01-21 5:53 ` Stephen Rothwell -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2012-07-06 6:14 Stephen Rothwell 2012-07-06 7:01 ` Linus Walleij 2012-07-06 8:55 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-07-08 19:14 ` Linus Walleij 2012-07-09 2:04 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-07-09 20:34 ` Linus Walleij 2012-07-24 3:56 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-08-22 5:03 ` Kuninori Morimoto 2012-08-23 21:43 ` Linus Walleij 2012-08-27 1:16 ` Kuninori Morimoto
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).