[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54F439A8.2010606@collabora.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:21:28 +0100
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>,
Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/chrome: add missing include in cros_ec_lpc driver
Hello Arnd,
On 03/02/2015 11:01 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The newly added cros_ec_lpc driver is meant for x86 but can
> also be built on other architectures. However, the original
> version causes a compile error when built on ARM because
> of a missing #include:
>
> drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc.c: In function 'ec_response_timed_out':
> drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc.c:40:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'inb' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> if (!(inb(EC_LPC_ADDR_HOST_CMD) & EC_LPC_STATUS_BUSY_MASK))
> ^
>
> This includes linux/io.h to make it compile reliably.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Fixes: ec2f33ab582bf ("platform/chrome: Add cros_ec_lpc driver for x86 devices")
> Cc: Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>
> Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>
> Cc: Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>
> Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc.c
> index 822fdb36ded9..f00bf4d246a1 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc.c
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>
> #include <linux/dmi.h>
> #include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> #include <linux/mfd/cros_ec.h>
> #include <linux/mfd/cros_ec_commands.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
>
I posted the exact same patch [0] on Friday along with other two fixes [1].
Besides this build error fix, in the series there is another patch to make
the driver depends on X86 || COMPILE_TEST which I believe is the best trade
off to avoid building it unnecesarily on ARM but still get build coverage.
Best regards,
Javier
[0]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/27/9
[1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/27/10
--
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