RE: [PATCH] cpufreq: exynos: Fix the compile error

[Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>]

Kukjin Kim wrote:
> 
> Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >
> > And please use Rafael's email id from Maintainers..
> >
> > On 16 May 2014 13:25, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > On 16 May 2014 13:20, Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com> wrote:
> > >> Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from
> > >> plat to
> > >> mach")
> > >
> > > Why do you have a line break here ?
> > >
> > >> which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage for cpufreq-exynos
> > >> like
> > >> following:
> > >
> > > Enter a blank line here..
> > >
> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration
> > >> of function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
> > >> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >
> > > Let these cross 80 columns, don't break them, its unreadable.
> > >
> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
> > >> of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > >> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
> > >> of function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
> > >> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration
> > >> of function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
> > >> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > >> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > >> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function
> > 'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
> > >> drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit
> > >> declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
> > >> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > >> make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
> > >> make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2
> > >
> > > Two blank lines here.
> > >
> > >> This fixes above error with getting SoC information via DT instead of
> > >> soc_is_exynosXXXX().
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@samsung.com>
> > >> ---
> > >>  .../devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-exynos.txt |   18 ++++++++
> > >>  drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm                        |    4 +-
> > >>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c                   |   47
> > >> +++++++++++++++++---
> > >>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h                   |    8 ++++
> > >>  drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c               |   11 ++---
> > >>  5 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > I don't think anybody can call that a fix :)
> > >
> > > So what you have done is combined 'fix' with 'cleanups or
> improvements'.
> > > That's surely wrong..
> > >
> Well, I think this is really _fix_ the build error, this adds support DT
> binding for exynos cpufreq stuff though. Because we cannot cover exynos
> cpufreq without this and you can see that on current -next tree.
> 
One more, now we don't have another choice to support various exynos SoCs for cpufreq.

> > > Just give a simple fix for this breakage that will go in 3.15 and do
> > > the DT stuff in another patch for 3.16..
> 
> In 3.15, it should be fine. Please check the -next tree and this should be
> sent to upstream for 3.16 not 3.15 via samsung tree with the patch (commit
> ID 7da83a80) which causes the build error.
> 
But I think, Jonghwan needs to clarify that in commit subject and log...not just 'fix'.

- Kukjin