[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <494faa28-e994-14e9-71da-07f5214b4579@csgroup.eu>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 12:36:36 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
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
Le 18/05/2020 à 12:32, Jiri Kosina a écrit :
> 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?
>
There is a series aiming at making use of it, see
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=172421
Christophe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists