[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <g4ao09$be3$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:44:41 +0000 (UTC)
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 27 - build fails at
tc6393xb_attach_irq() with randconfig build
Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> randconfig build fails on next-20080627 kernelk with CONFIG_MFD_TC6393XB
> enabled
>
> CC drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.o
> drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.c: In function ‘tc6393xb_attach_irq’:
> drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.c:269: error: implicit declaration of function
> ‘set_irq_flags’ drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.c:269: error: ‘IRQF_VALID’
> undeclared (first use in this function) drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.c:269:
> error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
> drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.c:269: error: for each function it appears in.)
> drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.c:269: error: ‘IRQF_PROBE’ undeclared (first use in
> this function) drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.c:272: error: ‘IRQT_FALLING’
> undeclared (first use in this function) make[2]: ***
> [drivers/mfd/tc6393xb.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [drivers/mfd] Error 2
> make: *** [drivers] Error 2
IRQT_FALLING will be replaced with IRQ_TYPE_FALLING_EDGE.
However I've a question. set_irq_flags is arm-only thing to change the
status IRQ_NOREQUEST, IRQ_NOPROBE etc. Most other arches (except ppc)
don't even bother touching IRQ_NOREQUEST. Should I change tc6393xb to
depend on ARM or make call to set_irq_flags ARM-dependant?
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists