From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomi Valkeinen Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 07:50:21 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAPDSS: fix omapfb build error due missing feat functions declaration Message-Id: <567900BD.6070907@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="EBoS8Lof5KcgKnx2sB56BAwk496S2SwlO" List-Id: References: <1450722384-4606-1-git-send-email-javier@osg.samsung.com> In-Reply-To: <1450722384-4606-1-git-send-email-javier@osg.samsung.com> To: Javier Martinez Canillas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Tony Lindgren , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, Dave Airlie , Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , Rob Clark , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org --EBoS8Lof5KcgKnx2sB56BAwk496S2SwlO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Javier, On 21/12/15 20:26, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > The omapfb is failing to build in -next due missing declarations for > dss_feat_get_supported_displays() and dss_feat_get_supported_outputs():= >=20 > CC [M] drivers/video/fbdev/omap2//omapfb/dss/dss.o > drivers/video/fbdev/omap2//omapfb/dss/dss.c: In function 'dss_save_cont= ext': > drivers/video/fbdev/omap2//omapfb/dss/dss.c:144:2: error: implicit decl= aration of function 'dss_feat_get_supported_displays' [-Werror=3Dimplicit= -function-declaration] >=20 > Add the declaration for these functions in the dss_features.h header > file to fix this compile error. >=20 > Also, remove the functions export since are not used outside the driver= =2E Thanks! Yep, I messed that up. I thought I had tested it, but apparently I only tested the final for-next only for omapdrm, which does compile and work. omapdss.h is the the only file still shared between omapdrm and omapfb after the copy-omapdss-series (I'll work on omapdss.h later), and of course there was a change to omapdss.h which broke the build. So I rebased the copy-omapdss-series on top of the rest of the omapdss patches, and updated the "omapfb: copy omapdss & displays for omapfb" to make a fresh copy of omapdss for omapfb. I think it's better to update the series, rather than applying fixes for already confusing series. I've pushed new version to my for-next branch. Tomi --EBoS8Lof5KcgKnx2sB56BAwk496S2SwlO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWeQC+AAoJEPo9qoy8lh71CfYP/A+1xLqxUAVYcGwTlceZP7nK +E4y/81UP8pW5VS6UkXNgqUkkPVBgBFAN7flEWh1eN24budXL13UiYojOu6ny6C/ qLC/ywtuLEo17GJ2yzl9HiBE4EZvBLdyyS9BLJoPY8zJK5hcGpDV0lZyr1+lVc0I JgMbwJsBwFyxEBlIiHEphmADy2cSSge5nCTF8gUtcJw6RyORCNiY/1IkhPKuC2Jg RUuqBS+7Vzlf3Py5B6yXpGZFOlXj5w3t+zE7V2cgYCYpcJg+Y8e0cN/yUw9A6ydx XOXgP8uo3lZx51+2TthZNhhHjeWPMBee5HAMHuHqYaC3lVZ/CM5jiDf53Y0D5kCC 24TVjfG516Ro//F6RjbIgNLQBFjAw0i6W42gXxmWSKRlpR6bo2QpIkxUjOIIfg/H oQkISSHdFou+DpbyzqzDfMjUpy9b83gOLSji0+X60JHQ5rS3JGcwnjMTVEDFz+Dr tetxNoJfw9tk1KZvOgOZg96WijXnHUr428TOFjuntbSyCqWmA1FNpYXNws85TJE6 gxjNuqQVBXqO7P7y+6kgKZHRvAcBohMGfxnFvtApmvzygk4NHOCv5RPAfB+qBxgp EOeSJebK/177cFDIVq3fww5mYti5TgiLksnHRJqoaZCQGYH5sJg03lPZSWlR2we3 NqqzbzX/I3Z0qCphIp7i =wzOn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --EBoS8Lof5KcgKnx2sB56BAwk496S2SwlO--