linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 03/11] gpio: davinci: Modify to platform driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <518397C60809E147AF5323E0420B992E3EADA96F@DBDE04.ent.ti.com>
Date:	Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:18:01 +0000
From:	"Philip, Avinash" <avinashphilip@...com>
To:	"Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@...com>
CC:	"khilman@...prootsystems.com" <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"grant.likely@...retlab.ca" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	"linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com" 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 03/11] gpio: davinci: Modify to platform driver

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 13:59:53, Nori, Sekhar wrote:
> On 6/13/2013 1:02 PM, Philip, Avinash wrote:
> 
> > With tnetv107x_defconfig build is failing
> > 
> > arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-tnetv107x-evm.c:282:15: error:
> >  'davinci_timer_init' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-tnetv107x-evm.c:284:15: error:
> >  'davinci_init_late' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > make[1]: *** [arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-tnetv107x-evm.o] Error 1
> > 
> > Following patch fixes the build above breakage
> 
> The error you are seeing and the patch you provided below have no
> correlation.

No. Above build error fixed by
 
+#include <mach/common.h>

Other changes are not related to above error.

> 
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-tnetv107x-evm.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-tnetv107x-evm.c
> > index ba79837..4a9c320 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-tnetv107x-evm.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-tnetv107x-evm.c
> > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
> >  #include <asm/mach/arch.h>
> >  #include <asm/mach-types.h>
> > 
> > +#include <mach/common.h>
> >  #include <mach/irqs.h>
> >  #include <mach/edma.h>
> >  #include <mach/mux.h>
> > @@ -147,7 +148,7 @@ static struct davinci_nand_pdata nand_config = {
> >         .ecc_bits       = 1,
> >  };
> > 
> > -static struct davinci_uart_config serial_config __initconst = {
> > +static struct davinci_uart_config serial_config = {
> >         .enabled_uarts  = BIT(1),
> >  };
> 
> You can make this __initdata instead - assuming its okay to have this
> memory discarded at init.

I will check.

> 
> > 
> > @@ -245,7 +246,7 @@ static struct ti_ssp_data ssp_config = {
> >         },
> >  };
> > 
> > -static struct tnetv107x_device_info evm_device_info __initconst = {
> > +static struct tnetv107x_device_info evm_device_info = {
> 
> Same here. You can make this __initdata.
> 
> Please send a formal patch for the errors you have seen.

Ok

> 
> >         .serial_config          = &serial_config,
> >         .mmc_config[1]          = &mmc_config,  /* controller 1 */
> >         .nand_config[0]         = &nand_config, /* chip select 0 */
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>
> >>>
> >>> So I prefer to leave tnetv107x platform for now.
> >>
> >> I don't think that's acceptable. At least by me.
> > 
> > I think 2 options are available
> > 1. Convert gpio-tnetv107x.c to platform driver. This will help in
> > 	removing gpio references in davinci_soc_info structure.
> > 2. Remove inline gpio api support and start use gpiolib support.
> > 
> > I prefer first option. It will help in removing
> > <arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/gpio-davinci.h>.
> 
> Okay. Can you take this up in this series? I understand you may not have
> an tnetv107x board, but at least you can get to a series that builds.
> 
> Even if you choose to do just option #2, I am OK. What I really want to
> see is inline API gone completely (not just remain largely unused). This
> will also help you avoid exposing internal data structures like
> davinci_gpio_controller exposed to the whole kernel. The worse part
> right now is you have two copies of the same structure exposed globally
> from two different include folders.

I understood. I will take option 2.

Thanks
Avinash

> 
> Thanks,
> Sekhar
>