[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f608b67d0910070923h54c30c2doae08550b0791ed1b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:23:04 -0700
From: vb@...e.com
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linuxppc <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Andy Fleming <afleming@...escale.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: Nested function in drivers/of/of_mdio.c
Guys, are there other instances of nested C functions in the codebase
or was this the first attempt?
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Jérôme Pouiller <jezz@...mic.org> wrote:
>> Dear,
>>
>> I have a problem with commit 8bc487d150b939e69830c39322df4ee486efe381
>> in file drivers/of/of_mdio.c in function of_phy_find_device.
>>
>> As you see, this function define match() as a nested function. My
>> compiler (powerpc-e500-linux-gnu-gcc-3.4.1) raise an error during link
>> due to this nested definition:
>> drivers/built-in.o(.text+0x5e2a4): In function `of_phy_find_device': /home/jezz/linux-next/drivers/of/of_mdio.c:107:
>> undefined reference to `__trampoline_setup'
>>
>> I am sure I could solve problem by rebuilding my toolchain.
>> Nevertheless, I think nested function definition is not perfectly
>> supported by all compilers. Also, I suggest to place function match()
>> outside of scope of of_phy_find_device as in following patch.
>
> I'm okay with that, but if you're moving code out of the file scope,
> then please rename the function to of_phy_match() to avoid global
> namespace conflicts.
>
> g.
>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_mdio.c b/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
>> index bacaa53..c7b2e26 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_mdio.c
>> @@ -97,6 +97,10 @@ int of_mdiobus_register(struct mii_bus *mdio, struct device_node *np)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_mdiobus_register);
>>
>> +static int match(struct device *dev, void *phy_np)
>> +{
>> + return dev_archdata_get_node(&dev->archdata) == phy_np;
>> +}
>> /**
>> * of_phy_find_device - Give a PHY node, find the phy_device
>> * @phy_np: Pointer to the phy's device tree node
>> @@ -106,11 +110,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_mdiobus_register);
>> struct phy_device *of_phy_find_device(struct device_node *phy_np)
>> {
>> struct device *d;
>> - int match(struct device *dev, void *phy_np)
>> - {
>> - return dev_archdata_get_node(&dev->archdata) == phy_np;
>> - }
>> -
>> if (!phy_np)
>> return NULL;
>>
>>
>> What do you think about it?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> --
>> Jérôme Pouiller (jezz AT sysmic DOT org)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
> Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists