From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: olof@lixom.net (Olof Johansson) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:11:49 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] arm64/sunxi: 4.6-rc1: Add dependency on generic irq chip In-Reply-To: <1459245786-11905-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> References: <1459245786-11905-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> Message-ID: <20160412191149.GC4174@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:03:06AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > Commit ce3dd55b99b1 ("arm64: Introduce Allwinner SoC config option"), > added support for ARCH_SUNXI on arm64, but failed to select > GENERIC_IRQ_CHIP, which is required for drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c > and causes build failures like : > > UPD include/generated/compile.h > CC init/version.o > LD init/built-in.o > drivers/built-in.o: In function `sunxi_sc_nmi_set_type': > drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c:114: undefined reference to `irq_setup_alt_chip' > drivers/built-in.o: In function `irq_domain_add_linear': > include/linux/irqdomain.h:253: undefined reference to `irq_generic_chip_ops' > include/linux/irqdomain.h:253: undefined reference to `irq_generic_chip_ops' > drivers/built-in.o: In function `sunxi_sc_nmi_irq_init': > drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c:146: undefined reference to `irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips' > drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c:161: undefined reference to `irq_get_domain_generic_chip' > drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c:170: undefined reference to `irq_gc_mask_clr_bit' > drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c:171: undefined reference to `irq_gc_mask_set_bit' > drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c:172: undefined reference to `irq_gc_ack_set_bit' > drivers/irqchip/irq-sunxi-nmi.c:170: undefined reference to `irq_gc_mask_clr_bit' > > Fixes: commit ce3dd55b99b1 ("arm64: Introduce Allwinner SoC config option") > Cc: Andre Przywara > Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose It'd be nice to have a silent Kconfig entry that selects from ARCH_SUNXI that sets this dependency, instead of having it from the architecture code. This pushes down the dependency to the right level. Can you respin with it like that instead? -Olof