[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2005181232140.25812@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 12:32:53 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
cc: WANG Wenhu <wenhu.wang@...o.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
wenhu.pku@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/sysdev: fix compile errors
On Mon, 18 May 2020, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > > Include linux/io.h into fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c to fix the
> > > implicit-declaration compile errors when building Cache-Sram.
> > >
> > > arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c: In function
> > > ‘instantiate_cache_sram’:
> > > arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c:97:26: error: implicit declaration
> > > of function ‘ioremap_coherent’; did you mean ‘bitmap_complement’?
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > cache_sram->base_virt = ioremap_coherent(cache_sram->base_phys,
> > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > bitmap_complement
> > > arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c:97:24: error: assignment makes
> > > pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> > > cache_sram->base_virt = ioremap_coherent(cache_sram->base_phys,
> > > ^
> > > arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_sram.c:123:2: error: implicit declaration
> > > of function ‘iounmap’; did you mean ‘roundup’?
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > iounmap(cache_sram->base_virt);
> > > ^~~~~~~
> > > roundup
> > > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > >
> > > Fixed: commit 6db92cc9d07d ("powerpc/85xx: add cache-sram support")
> > > Signed-off-by: WANG Wenhu <wenhu.wang@...o.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
>
> As this doesn't seem to have been picked up for linux-next yet, I am
> picking it up now.
Only now I've noticed that this is actually a dead code o_O as this file
can't be built by any combination of config options. So I am dropping the
patch again, but why do we keep it in the tree in the first place?
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists