From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: pawel.moll@arm.com (Pawel Moll)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 14:11:25 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] drivers/bus: make arm-ccn.c driver explicitly
 non-modular
In-Reply-To: <20160329123021.GD6745@arm.com>
References: <1459113058-14340-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
 <1459113058-14340-5-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
 <20160329114525.GC6745@arm.com> <1459252386.5053.18.camel@arm.com>
 <20160329123021.GD6745@arm.com>
Message-ID: <1459257085.2461.2.camel@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 13:30 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 12:53:06PM +0100, Pawel Moll wrote:
> > Dnia 2016-03-29, Tue o godzinie 12:45 +0100, Will Deacon pisze:
> > > I'd much rather fix the driver to build as a module, if at all
> > > possible.
> > > Suzuki (CC'd) is taking a look at that, so please drop this patch
> > > for
> > > now.
> > 
> > There's no problem with building arm-ccn.c as a module - all it's
> > really doing today is providing a PMU driver. I don't even know why
> > have I made it bool-only in the first place...
> 
> Probably because it doesn't compile due to the irq_set_affinity call.

The original arm-ccn.c did not call it at all. My guess is that I
copied ARM_CCI stanza without thinking. But I'm glad Suzuki will
straighten it out :-)

Pawe?