linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is

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

Date:	Mon, 12 Oct 2015 10:29:41 -0700
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Keerthy <a0393675@...com>
Cc:	Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux@....linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_*

* Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> [151012 10:17]:
> * Keerthy <a0393675@...com> [150901 17:24]:
> > 
> > 
> > On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:33 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > >* Keerthy <a0393675@...com> [150901 10:22]:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>On Wednesday 26 August 2015 09:29 AM, Keerthy wrote:
> > >>>Currently apart from dra7, omap5 and amx3 all the other SoCs
> > >>>are identified using cpu_is_* functions which is not right since
> > >>>they are all SoCs(System on Chips). Hence changing the SoC
> > >>>identification code to use soc_is instead of cpu_is and keeping
> > >>>defines for cpu_is where needed. This allows us to replace the
> > >>>rest of cpu_is usage along with other fixes as needed.
> > >>
> > >>Tony,
> > >>
> > >>A Gentle ping on this.
> > >
> > >Looks good to me for v4.4. I'll apply it after some testing
> > >after -rc1.
> > 
> > Thanks Tony.
> 
> Now with the fixes finally out of the way, applying into
> omap-for-v4.4/cleanup.

Uhh actually not applying. This breaks builds quite a bit depending on
the .config options chosen:

arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:257:15: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap243x’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:259:8: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap44xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
...
arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:389:7: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap34xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
...
arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:389:7: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap34xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
...
arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:257:15: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap243x’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:259:8: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap44xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
...
arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

Keerthy, can you please test this with just single SoC configurations
and run randconfig builds on this overnight.

And then we obviously need to test to make sure that this does not
break booting on various platforms for multi SoC and single SoC
configurations.

And then you can repost, please include what all was tested.

Thanks,

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/