[PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: Fix compile error when FB_OMAP2 is not set

[PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: Fix compile error when FB_OMAP2 is not set

[Tony Lindgren]

Otherwise we will get:

arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c:101: error: expected ?)? before ?*? token

Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>

---

Tomi, you need something like this for what you have in for-next.

--- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
@@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ arch_initcall(omap_init_fb);
 
 #else
 
-void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(omap_lcd_config *config) { }
+void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(const struct omap_lcd_config *config)
+{
+}
 
 #endif

[PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: Fix compile error when FB_OMAP2 is not set

[Tony Lindgren]

* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [120308 12:11]:
> Otherwise we will get:
> 
> arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c:101: error: expected ?)? before ?*? token
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
> 
> ---
> 
> Tomi, you need something like this for what you have in for-next.
> 
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
> @@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ arch_initcall(omap_init_fb);
>  
>  #else
>  
> -void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(omap_lcd_config *config) { }
> +void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(const struct omap_lcd_config *config)
> +{
> +}
>  
>  #endif

Also now seeing the following with what you have in for-next:

drivers/video/omap2/displays/panel-taal.c: In function ?taal_num_errors_show?:
drivers/video/omap2/displays/panel-taal.c:605: warning: ?errors? may be used uninitialized in this function

Tony

[PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: Fix compile error when FB_OMAP2 is not set

[Tomi Valkeinen]

On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 12:43 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Otherwise we will get:
> 
> arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c:101: error: expected ?)? before ?*? token
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>

Thanks. It seems I need to improve my testing practices to include
non-FB builds also...

 Tomi

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120309/499205b3/attachment-0001.sig>

[PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: Fix compile error when FB_OMAP2 is not set

[Tomi Valkeinen]

On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 12:46 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [120308 12:11]:
> > Otherwise we will get:
> > 
> > arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c:101: error: expected ?)? before ?*? token
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Tomi, you need something like this for what you have in for-next.
> > 
> > --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
> > @@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ arch_initcall(omap_init_fb);
> >  
> >  #else
> >  
> > -void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(omap_lcd_config *config) { }
> > +void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(const struct omap_lcd_config *config)
> > +{
> > +}
> >  
> >  #endif
> 
> Also now seeing the following with what you have in for-next:
> 
> drivers/video/omap2/displays/panel-taal.c: In function ?taal_num_errors_show?:
> drivers/video/omap2/displays/panel-taal.c:605: warning: ?errors? may be used uninitialized in this function

Hmm, my compiler doesn't complain (codesourcery 2010.09-50), so I didn't
notice that. Which compiler version reports the warning?

I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's a false warning, the code path that
uses "errors" should only be ran when "errors" has been set.

 Tomi

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120309/bf151e56/attachment-0001.sig>

[PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: Fix compile error when FB_OMAP2 is not set

[Tony Lindgren]

* Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> [120309 00:14]:
> On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 12:46 -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [120308 12:11]:
> > > Otherwise we will get:
> > > 
> > > arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c:101: error: expected ?)? before ?*? token
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Tomi, you need something like this for what you have in for-next.
> > > 
> > > --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/fb.c
> > > @@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ arch_initcall(omap_init_fb);
> > >  
> > >  #else
> > >  
> > > -void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(omap_lcd_config *config) { }
> > > +void __init omapfb_set_lcd_config(const struct omap_lcd_config *config)
> > > +{
> > > +}
> > >  
> > >  #endif
> > 
> > Also now seeing the following with what you have in for-next:
> > 
> > drivers/video/omap2/displays/panel-taal.c: In function ?taal_num_errors_show?:
> > drivers/video/omap2/displays/panel-taal.c:605: warning: ?errors? may be used uninitialized in this function
> 
> Hmm, my compiler doesn't complain (codesourcery 2010.09-50), so I didn't
> notice that. Which compiler version reports the warning?
> 
> I'm not 100% sure, but I think it's a false warning, the code path that
> uses "errors" should only be ran when "errors" has been set.

This seems to depend on the .config options somehow. Not getting
it with omap2plus_defconfig, but getting it at least with Russell's
omap4430-sdp seed config from:

http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/build/

Using now emdebian 4.3.5-4 as there seems to be some issues
showing all the section warnings with CodeSourcery and Linaro
toolchains.

Regards,

Tony