Re: [PATCH] MIPS: rb532: move GPIOD definition into C-files

[Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>]

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 05:56:03PM +0800, Jackie Liu wrote:
> 
> 在 2022/3/30 下午5:41, Andy Shevchenko 写道:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 12:32 PM Thomas Bogendoerfer
> > <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 12:23:59PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 9:45 AM Thomas Bogendoerfer
> > > > <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de> wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 09:46:07AM +0800, Jackie Liu wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > > > > I have a patchset, where the both files will go away. No need to
> > > > > clean up now.
> > > > 
> > > > Do you plan them to be backported? If not, I would recommend applying
> > > 
> > > no plan for backporting
> > > 
> > > > this patch in order to have it backported and then do whatever you
> > > > want we those files.
> > > 
> > > why ? This doesn't fix anything, doesn't it ?
> 
> Like the patch I submitted in the first version, there are some gcc
> errors.
> 
> [...]
> drivers/iio/adc/da9150-gpadc.c:254:13: error: ‘DA9150_GPADC_CHAN_0x08’
> undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean ‘DA9150_GPADC_CHAN_TBAT’?
>    254 |  .channel = DA9150_GPADC_CHAN_##_id,   \
>        |             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  drivers/iio/adc/da9150-gpadc.c:273:2: note: in expansion of macro
> ‘DA9150_GPADC_CHANNEL’
>    273 |  DA9150_GPADC_CHANNEL(_id, _hw_id, _type,   \
>        |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  drivers/iio/adc/da9150-gpadc.c:281:2: note: in expansion of macro
> ‘DA9150_GPADC_CHANNEL_PROCESSED’
>    281 |  DA9150_GPADC_CHANNEL_PROCESSED(GPIOD, GPIOD_6V, IIO_VOLTAGE,
> NULL),
>        |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> make[4]: *** [../scripts/Makefile.build:288: drivers/iio/adc/da9150-gpadc.o]
> Error 1
> make[3]: *** [../scripts/Makefile.build:550: drivers/iio/adc] Error 2
> make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> 
> > 
> > It fixes compilation breakage in some cases. I think the author of
> > this patch can (should) elaborate.
> > Also, it might need a Fixes tag.
> 
> 
> Um, it's really hard to say which commit is fixed, just because this
> header file defines a GPIOD, and someone else uses this later.

ok, now I got it.

> > > But if it makes people happy, I'll apply it.
> > 
> > Yes, please.

will do,

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]