[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5dc37564-2efe-d090-78a4-1702291b176d@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:24:55 +0530
From: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>
CC: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: davinci: don't mark vpif_input structures as
'const'
Hi Arnd,
On Thursday 27 July 2017 03:42 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> A change to the platform data definitions caused a warning in the board code:
>
> arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c:680:13: error: initialization discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Werror=discarded-qualifiers]
> arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c:690:13: error: initialization discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Werror=discarded-qualifiers]
You can replace these by:
arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c:1221:13: warning: initialization discards ‘const’ qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers]
arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c:1231:13: warning: initialization discards ‘const’ qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers]
to match with this patch.
>
> This is a bit unfortunate, since we generally like structure definitions to
> be const, but as this is legacy code, the easiest way out is still to
> remove the 'const' annotation here.
>
> Fixes: 4a5f8ae50b66 ("[media] davinci: vpif_capture: get subdevs from DT when available")
> Fixes: 231ce279e6e3 ("ARM: davinci: fix const warnings")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Acked-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
Looks like this slipped my testing since I had
CONFIG_DA850_UI_SD_VIDEO_PORT switched off. Thanks for catching it.
> ---
> I originally sent my fix on Jun 9, but Kevin had already applied an
> identical fix for two of the three affected files. This fixes the
> third one that his patch missed.
>
> I have a couple of other patches that I'm planning to apply directly
> to the fixes branch now, and would do the same for this one unless
> there are objections.
No problem. Thanks!
~Sekhar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists