[PATCH] clk: fix compile testing of scpi clk driver

[PATCH] clk: fix compile testing of scpi clk driver

[Heiner Kallweit]

We now have a hard dependency on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL and may end up with
the following error:
ERROR: "get_scpi_ops" [drivers/clk/clk-scpi.ko] undefined!
Fix this by removing COMPILE_TEST from COMMON_CLK_SCPI dependencies.

Fixes: f7fee8be06a6 "firmware: arm_scpi: remove default for get_scpi_ops if not reachable"
Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/clk/Kconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
index 1c4e1aa67..fe6fd705f 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ config COMMON_CLK_HI655X
 
 config COMMON_CLK_SCPI
 	tristate "Clock driver controlled via SCPI interface"
-	depends on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL || COMPILE_TEST
+	depends on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL
 	  ---help---
 	  This driver provides support for clocks that are controlled
 	  by firmware that implements the SCPI interface.
-- 
2.15.0

[PATCH] clk: fix compile testing of scpi clk driver

[Stephen Boyd]

On 11/28, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> We now have a hard dependency on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL and may end up with
> the following error:
> ERROR: "get_scpi_ops" [drivers/clk/clk-scpi.ko] undefined!
> Fix this by removing COMPILE_TEST from COMMON_CLK_SCPI dependencies.
> 
> Fixes: f7fee8be06a6 "firmware: arm_scpi: remove default for get_scpi_ops if not reachable"

I don't see this commit anywhere. Is this a future issue?

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

[PATCH] clk: fix compile testing of scpi clk driver

[Heiner Kallweit]

Am 29.11.2017 um 18:04 schrieb Stephen Boyd:
> On 11/28, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> We now have a hard dependency on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL and may end up with
>> the following error:
>> ERROR: "get_scpi_ops" [drivers/clk/clk-scpi.ko] undefined!
>> Fix this by removing COMPILE_TEST from COMMON_CLK_SCPI dependencies.
>>
>> Fixes: f7fee8be06a6 "firmware: arm_scpi: remove default for get_scpi_ops if not reachable"
> 
> I don't see this commit anywhere. Is this a future issue?
> 
Sorry, yes it is and the patch was primarily addressed to Sudeep. See here:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sudeep.holla/linux.git/log/?h=for-next/scpi

[PATCH] clk: fix compile testing of scpi clk driver

[Sudeep Holla]

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 07:58:23AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> We now have a hard dependency on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL and may end up with
> the following error:
> ERROR: "get_scpi_ops" [drivers/clk/clk-scpi.ko] undefined!
> Fix this by removing COMPILE_TEST from COMMON_CLK_SCPI dependencies.
> 
> Fixes: f7fee8be06a6 "firmware: arm_scpi: remove default for get_scpi_ops if not reachable"

This doesn't exist for all practical purposes. I pushed a branch to test
the commit as I was sure that it will cause build regression but I could
not figure to get that config. The Kbuild bot did find the issue.

You are introducing the bug in f7fee8be06a6 and trying to fix here, both of
them are wrong.

--
Regards,
Sudeep

[PATCH] clk: fix compile testing of scpi clk driver

[Sudeep Holla]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 09:37:46PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> Am 29.11.2017 um 18:04 schrieb Stephen Boyd:
> > On 11/28, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >> We now have a hard dependency on ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL and may end up with
> >> the following error:
> >> ERROR: "get_scpi_ops" [drivers/clk/clk-scpi.ko] undefined!
> >> Fix this by removing COMPILE_TEST from COMMON_CLK_SCPI dependencies.
> >>
> >> Fixes: f7fee8be06a6 "firmware: arm_scpi: remove default for get_scpi_ops if not reachable"
> > 
> > I don't see this commit anywhere. Is this a future issue?
> > 
> Sorry, yes it is and the patch was primarily addressed to Sudeep. See here:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sudeep.holla/linux.git/log/?h=for-next/scpi

I was trying to figure the build regression that the above commit would
cause as I could not find it myself but I was sure about the regression.

If I had pulled it officially ;), I would have responded to your original
patch. Sorry for the name of the brnach, I should have used something else
to avoid the confusion.

--
Regards,
Sudeep