From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755457AbbKGBYm (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Nov 2015 20:24:42 -0500 Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net ([208.91.199.152]:41829 "EHLO bh-25.webhostbox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751068AbbKGBYk (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Nov 2015 20:24:40 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] net: hisilicon: Never build on SPARC To: Arnd Bergmann References: <1445437773-23261-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> <20151021215320.GB23371@roeck-us.net> <20151106191652.GA4046@roeck-us.net> <3819536.piFndcizrV@wuerfel> Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: <563D52D4.2020607@roeck-us.net> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 17:24:36 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3819536.piFndcizrV@wuerfel> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated_sender: linux@roeck-us.net X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - bh-25.webhostbox.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - roeck-us.net X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: bh-25.webhostbox.net: authenticated_id: linux@roeck-us.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/06/2015 12:30 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 06 November 2015 11:16:52 Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 02:53:20PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 09:11:53PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>> On Wednesday 21 October 2015 10:03:05 Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>>> Anyway, if it gets that complicated, I think we should stick with >>>>> just returning OF_BAD_ADDR. The above really suggests the need for >>>>> an architecture specific solution. >>>> >>>> Probably no harm in this really: the far more common >>>> of_address_to_resource() and of_iomap() helpers are equally >>>> broken on SPARC and we just return a runtime error for those >>>> as well without CONFIG_OF_ADDRESS rather than breaking the build. >>>> >>> Agreed. Given this, returning OF_BAD_ADDR sounds like a better choice. >>> >> Arnd, >> >> do you know if a fix for this problem is pending in some branch ? >> Mainline sparc builds are now affected. >> > > I don't think anyone wrote the patch to do this. Can you send one? > I'll see what I can do. Guenter