From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pawel.moll@arm.com (Pawel Moll) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:11:41 +0100 Subject: [PATCH V2] MFD: Make VEXPRESS MFD controller depends on VEXPRESS systems In-Reply-To: <1376312115-10326-1-git-send-email-manjunath.goudar@linaro.org> References: <1375592514-14213-1-git-send-email-manjunath.goudar@linaro.org> <1376312115-10326-1-git-send-email-manjunath.goudar@linaro.org> Message-ID: <1376313101.13400.2.camel@hornet> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 13:55 +0100, Manjunath Goudar wrote: > This patch adds a of_find_node_by_phandle() and of_get_next_parent() > function declaration dependence on"#ifdef CONFIG_OF" in "include/linux/of.h" > else part return inline dummy implementations (returning NULL). Without > this patch,build system can lead to issues. This was discovered during > randconfig testing,in which VEXPRESS_CONFIG was enabled w/o CONFIG_OF > being enabled,leading to the following error: > > CC drivers/mfd/vexpress-config.o > drivers/mfd/vexpress-config.c: In function ?__vexpress_config_func_get?: > drivers/mfd/vexpress-config.c:117:4: error: implicit declaration of function > ?of_find_node_by_phandle? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > bridge_node = of_find_node_by_phandle( > ^ > drivers/mfd/vexpress-config.c:117:16: warning: assignment makes pointer from > integer without a cast [enabled by default] > bridge_node = of_find_node_by_phandle( > > Signed-off-by: Manjunath Goudar > Cc: Arnd Bergmann > Cc: Pawel Moll > Cc: Deepak Saxena > Cc: Samuel Ortiz > Cc: Lee Jones > > V2: > -Made of_find_node_by_phandle() and of_get_next_parent() function declaration > dependence on"#ifdef CONFIG_OF" in "include/linux/of.h" instead of Kconfig > dependence setting in V1 patch and else part return inline dummy implementations > (returning NULL) to fix the above randconfig error. > --- > include/linux/of.h | 16 ++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) It's all cool, but the subject line doesn't make any sense now, does it? ;-) As in: it's not a vexpress- nor mfd-related patch any more. Pawel