[PATCH 1/3] pwm-core: fix compilation when OF is not selected

[PATCH 1/3] pwm-core: fix compilation when OF is not selected

[Eric Bénard]

else we get the following error :
drivers/pwm/core.c: In function 'pwm_get':
drivers/pwm/core.c:538:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_pwm_request' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>
---
 drivers/pwm/core.c |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c
index e5ab7cd..a7be0bc 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/core.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c
@@ -533,9 +533,11 @@ struct pwm_device *pwm_get(struct device *dev, const char *con_id)
 	unsigned int index;
 	unsigned int match;
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF
 	/* look up via DT first */
 	if (dev && dev->of_node)
 		return of_pwm_request(dev->of_node, con_id);
+#endif
 
 	/*
 	 * We look up the provider in the static table typically provided by
-- 
1.7.7.6

[PATCH 2/3] pwm-imx: set chip.dev to prevent probe failure

[Eric Bénard]

else pwmchip_add fails

Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>
---
 drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c
index ef9c51b..d69275f 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-imx.c
@@ -175,6 +175,7 @@ static int __devinit imx_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	imx->chip.ops = &imx_pwm_ops;
 	imx->chip.base = -1;
 	imx->chip.npwm = 1;
+	imx->chip.dev = &pdev->dev;
 
 	imx->clk_enabled = 0;
 
-- 
1.7.7.6

[PATCH 2/3] pwm-imx: set chip.dev to prevent probe failure

[Thierry Reding]

* Eric B?nard wrote:
> else pwmchip_add fails
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>

Are you okay with me folding your patch into the i.MX patch in the existing
series?

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120429/43c92787/attachment.sig>

[PATCH 3/3] pwm-core: fix registration of several pwm

[Eric Bénard]

* after a pwm is allocated using alloc_pwms, ret contains the number
of the pwm and is returned by pwmchip_add so the calling driver
(pwm-imx in my case) fails with the following log :
mxc_pwm: probe of mxc_pwm.1 failed with error 1
mxc_pwm: probe of mxc_pwm.2 failed with error 2
mxc_pwm: probe of mxc_pwm.3 failed with error 3

* this patch fix error handling in pwmchip_add

Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>
---
 drivers/pwm/core.c |    7 +++++--
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c
index a7be0bc..d3438e4 100644
--- a/drivers/pwm/core.c
+++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c
@@ -216,8 +216,10 @@ int pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip)
 		goto out;
 
 	chip->pwms = kzalloc(chip->npwm * sizeof(*pwm), GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!chip->pwms)
-		return -ENOMEM;
+	if (!chip->pwms) {
+		ret = -ENOMEM;
+		goto out;
+	}
 
 	chip->base = ret;
 
@@ -239,6 +241,7 @@ int pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip)
 	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF))
 		of_pwmchip_add(chip);
 
+	ret = 0;
 out:
 	mutex_unlock(&pwm_lock);
 	return ret;
-- 
1.7.7.6

[PATCH 3/3] pwm-core: fix registration of several pwm

[Thierry Reding]

* Eric B?nard wrote:
> * after a pwm is allocated using alloc_pwms, ret contains the number
> of the pwm and is returned by pwmchip_add so the calling driver
> (pwm-imx in my case) fails with the following log :
> mxc_pwm: probe of mxc_pwm.1 failed with error 1
> mxc_pwm: probe of mxc_pwm.2 failed with error 2
> mxc_pwm: probe of mxc_pwm.3 failed with error 3
> 
> * this patch fix error handling in pwmchip_add
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pwm/core.c |    7 +++++--
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/core.c b/drivers/pwm/core.c
> index a7be0bc..d3438e4 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/core.c
> @@ -216,8 +216,10 @@ int pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip)
>  		goto out;
>  
>  	chip->pwms = kzalloc(chip->npwm * sizeof(*pwm), GFP_KERNEL);
> -	if (!chip->pwms)
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> +	if (!chip->pwms) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto out;
> +	}

Good catch!

>  
>  	chip->base = ret;
>  
> @@ -239,6 +241,7 @@ int pwmchip_add(struct pwm_chip *chip)
>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF))
>  		of_pwmchip_add(chip);
>  
> +	ret = 0;
>  out:
>  	mutex_unlock(&pwm_lock);
>  	return ret;

pwmchip_add() is meant to return a negative error-code on failure, so a
positive return values would still indicate success, therefore any callers
should check explicitly for (ret < 0) instead of just (ret). However in this
case it might be safer to make the return value explicitly 0 in case of
success.

I'd like to fold this into the existing series as well, if that's okay with
you.

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120429/9288c84e/attachment.sig>

[PATCH 1/3] pwm-core: fix compilation when OF is not selected

[Thierry Reding]

* Eric B?nard wrote:
> else we get the following error :
> drivers/pwm/core.c: In function 'pwm_get':
> drivers/pwm/core.c:538:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_pwm_request' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>

This is solved a little differently in the latest patches. That no longer has
the of_pwm_request() function protected by #ifdef CONFIG_OF, but rather calls
it in a IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)-protected block so that it will still receive
compile coverage in !OF configurations but at the same time will be removed
by the compiler's dead code elimination.

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120429/60616669/attachment.sig>

[PATCH 1/3] pwm-core: fix compilation when OF is not selected

[Eric Bénard]

Le Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:04:31 +0200,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> a ?crit :

> * Eric B?nard wrote:
> > else we get the following error :
> > drivers/pwm/core.c: In function 'pwm_get':
> > drivers/pwm/core.c:538:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_pwm_request' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>
> 
> This is solved a little differently in the latest patches. That no longer has
> the of_pwm_request() function protected by #ifdef CONFIG_OF, but rather calls
> it in a IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)-protected block so that it will still receive
> compile coverage in !OF configurations but at the same time will be removed
> by the compiler's dead code elimination. 
> 
OK, this was based on de8eba0b1e53ee0d2e3270c12d6482971e2beb4b in your
tree dated the 27th march. I now see you updated it on friday.

Eric 

[PATCH 1/3] pwm-core: fix compilation when OF is not selected

[Eric Bénard]

Le Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:04:31 +0200,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> a ?crit :

> * Eric B?nard wrote:
> > else we get the following error :
> > drivers/pwm/core.c: In function 'pwm_get':
> > drivers/pwm/core.c:538:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_pwm_request' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>
> 
> This is solved a little differently in the latest patches. That no longer has
> the of_pwm_request() function protected by #ifdef CONFIG_OF, but rather calls
> it in a IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)-protected block so that it will still receive
> compile coverage in !OF configurations but at the same time will be removed
> by the compiler's dead code elimination.
> 
OK this still doesn't work (using linux-2.6 at :
f7b006931751f029620ad2f8310ac7a1484fbdb4 ) leads to :
 CC      drivers/pwm/core.o drivers/pwm/core.c: In function
 'of_pwm_request': drivers/pwm/core.c:447:3: error: implicit
 declaration of function
 'of_property_match_string' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
 drivers/pwm/core.c:452:2: error: implicit declaration of function
 'of_parse_phandle_with_args' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

in include/linux/of.h the declaration of these function is inside
a #ifdef CONFIG_OF / #endif so I don't see how this can compile.

Eric

[PATCH 1/3] pwm-core: fix compilation when OF is not selected

[Thierry Reding]

* Eric B?nard wrote:
> Le Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:04:31 +0200,
> Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> a ?crit :
> 
> > * Eric B?nard wrote:
> > > else we get the following error :
> > > drivers/pwm/core.c: In function 'pwm_get':
> > > drivers/pwm/core.c:538:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_pwm_request' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Eric B?nard <eric@eukrea.com>
> > 
> > This is solved a little differently in the latest patches. That no longer has
> > the of_pwm_request() function protected by #ifdef CONFIG_OF, but rather calls
> > it in a IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)-protected block so that it will still receive
> > compile coverage in !OF configurations but at the same time will be removed
> > by the compiler's dead code elimination.
> > 
> OK this still doesn't work (using linux-2.6 at :
> f7b006931751f029620ad2f8310ac7a1484fbdb4 ) leads to :
>  CC      drivers/pwm/core.o drivers/pwm/core.c: In function
>  'of_pwm_request': drivers/pwm/core.c:447:3: error: implicit
>  declaration of function
>  'of_property_match_string' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>  drivers/pwm/core.c:452:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>  'of_parse_phandle_with_args' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 
> in include/linux/of.h the declaration of these function is inside
> a #ifdef CONFIG_OF / #endif so I don't see how this can compile.

I've already posted patches to the devicetree-discuss mailing list. I hope
they'll be queued soon.

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120429/d0104846/attachment.sig>