From: Tirumala Marri <tmarri@apm.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, yur@emcraft.com,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] PPC4xx: ADMA separating SoC specific functions
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 17:54:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7a4fda4dcac9cc030907f3e5ed8a8967@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=JqTU898DfW1=4qcb2WbwHvroY6LqiAX_oBb5L@mail.gmail.com>
> You definitely need to be able to resolve "used but not defined" and
> "defined but not used" warnings before tackling a driver conversion
> like this. In light of this comment I wonder if it would be
> appropriate to submit your original driver, that just duplicated
> routines from the ppc440spe driver, to the -staging tree. Then it
> would be available for someone familiar with driver conversions to
> take a shot at unifying.
>
> Greg, is this an appropriate use of -staging?
The other option is to define non static functions in ppc440spe-adma.c
which are used in common
File adma.c . This way there will not be any warnings. Is this something
acceptable ?
Here is the break down
ppc440spe-adma.c: It will have all the 440spe SoC specific functions.
ppc4xx_adma.h will have the declarations from 440spe-adma.c as non static.
adma.c will have common functions which are independent of SoC.
Please suggest.
Regards,
-Marri
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tirumala Marri <tmarri@apm.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
yur@emcraft.com, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH] PPC4xx: ADMA separating SoC specific functions
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 17:54:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7a4fda4dcac9cc030907f3e5ed8a8967@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=JqTU898DfW1=4qcb2WbwHvroY6LqiAX_oBb5L@mail.gmail.com>
> You definitely need to be able to resolve "used but not defined" and
> "defined but not used" warnings before tackling a driver conversion
> like this. In light of this comment I wonder if it would be
> appropriate to submit your original driver, that just duplicated
> routines from the ppc440spe driver, to the -staging tree. Then it
> would be available for someone familiar with driver conversions to
> take a shot at unifying.
>
> Greg, is this an appropriate use of -staging?
The other option is to define non static functions in ppc440spe-adma.c
which are used in common
File adma.c . This way there will not be any warnings. Is this something
acceptable ?
Here is the break down
ppc440spe-adma.c: It will have all the 440spe SoC specific functions.
ppc4xx_adma.h will have the declarations from 440spe-adma.c as non static.
adma.c will have common functions which are independent of SoC.
Please suggest.
Regards,
-Marri
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-02 0:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-30 16:55 [PATCH] PPC4xx: ADMA separating SoC specific functions tmarri
2010-09-30 19:08 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-09-30 19:08 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-09-30 22:52 ` Dan Williams
2010-09-30 22:52 ` Dan Williams
2010-10-01 0:16 ` Tirumala Marri
2010-10-01 0:16 ` Tirumala Marri
2010-10-01 0:57 ` Dan Williams
2010-10-01 0:57 ` Dan Williams
2010-10-02 0:54 ` Tirumala Marri [this message]
2010-10-02 0:54 ` Tirumala Marri
2010-10-02 18:49 ` Greg KH
2010-10-02 18:49 ` Greg KH
2010-10-04 17:30 ` Tirumala Marri
2010-10-04 17:30 ` Tirumala Marri
2010-10-01 0:03 ` Tirumala Marri
2010-10-01 0:03 ` Tirumala Marri
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7a4fda4dcac9cc030907f3e5ed8a8967@mail.gmail.com \
--to=tmarri@apm.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=wd@denx.de \
--cc=yur@emcraft.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.