[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131019003925.GW15154@atomide.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 17:39:26 -0700
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
"pinctl-single.c" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 17 (pinctrl-single.c)
* Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> [131018 16:49]:
> * Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> [131018 16:41]:
> > On 10/18/13 16:39, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > >
> > > Looks like we need a little bit of arch specific handling
> > > with the generic IRQ. Fix the issue with an ifdef the
> > > same way as other drivers do.
> > >
> > > ARM needs things set to IRQF_VALID, which also then sets
> > > noprobe. Others seem to use just irq_set_noprobe().
> > >
> > > Otherwise we can get:
> > >
> > > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c: In function 'pcs_irqdomain_map':
> > > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c:1750:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'set_irq_flags' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >
> > Did you address this error? I don't see a fix for it...
>
> Yes set_irq_flags() is defined for ARM archs in
> arch/arm/include/asm/hw_irq.h which is included from
> include/linux/irq.h as <asm/hw_irq.h>. So the ifdef
> below takes care of that too.
>
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM
> > > + set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID);
> > > +#else
> > > + irq_set_noprobe(irq);
> > > +#endif
OK I've sent the pull request and Olof has now pulled the fix
into arm-soc next/dt branch.
Tony
--
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