[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMjpGUe_g9b3b+3nfi-h2k4-9WqFh1HwQ9aes6H5oUnKWRUAgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 16:16:41 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To: Hamo <hamo.by@...il.com>
Cc: arnd@...db.de, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: fix build error in include/asm-generic/gpio.h
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 21:38, Hamo wrote:
> Should call the platform-specific __gpio_{get,set}_value
> instead of generic gpio_{get,set}_value
>
> --- a/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/gpio.h
>
> static inline int gpio_get_value_cansleep(unsigned gpio)
> {
> might_sleep();
> - return gpio_get_value(gpio);
> + return __gpio_get_value(gpio);
> }
>
> static inline void gpio_set_value_cansleep(unsigned gpio, int value)
> {
> might_sleep();
> - gpio_set_value(gpio, value);
> + __gpio_set_value(gpio, value);
> }
your change log says very little, and this change looks incorrect to
me. __gpio_xxx type funcs exist in the GPIOLIB case, not in the
!GPIOLIB case. your patch is changing the !GPIOLIB case. so i don't
see how this could work: you're now calling funcs which are not
guaranteed to exist.
i notice this because i'm seeing build failures for somethings that
are using asm-generic/gpio.h, but not GPIOLIB.
so could you explain why exactly you need this and why you think this
is the right route to go ?
-mike
--
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