From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Simek Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: Kconfig: Add dependency on GPIOLIB for MMC_SDHCI Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 13:43:57 +0200 Message-ID: <55DEF7FD.8020904@xilinx.com> References: <6906e34b62f162018984a5fbd12b3ef6cd5e3a29.1438839562.git.michal.simek@xilinx.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ulf Hansson , Michal Simek Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Michal Simek , Scott Branden , Weijun Yang , Andrew Bresticker , Jean Delvare , Srinivas Kandagatla , linux-mmc , Alim Akhtar , addy ke , Stephen Boyd , Chaotian Jing , Kevin Hao , Vincent Yang List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Hi Ulf, On 08/27/2015 01:32 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 25 August 2015 at 14:04, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 6 August 2015 at 07:39, Michal Simek wrote: >>> Add GPIOLIB dependency for MMC_SDHCI. >>> >>> Problem was observed after adding the patch >>> "mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Call OF parsing for MMC" >>> (sha1: 16b23787fc709fe60c5d2bd05927b1a3da33d4e9) which calls >>> mmc_of_parse() -> mmc_gpiod_request_cd() (slot-gpio.c) which >>> calls devm_gpiod_get_index() which returns -ENOSYS. >>> >>> Error log: >>> sdhci-arasan ff160000.sdhci: parsing dt failed (4294967258) >>> sdhci-arasan: probe of ff160000.sdhci failed with error -38 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek >> >> Thanks, applied for next! > > kbuild test robot reports a warning for this one, so I am dropping it > from my next branch. I think is just better to fix the problem there instead of dropping this patch which fix GPIO dependency. Fix is quite easy. diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/Kconfig index 5538e57c36c1..874f07c7d0b8 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/Kconfig +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/Kconfig @@ -219,6 +219,7 @@ config AKEBONO select USB_EHCI_HCD_PLATFORM if USB_EHCI_HCD select MMC_SDHCI select MMC_SDHCI_PLTFM + select GPIOLIB select ATA select SATA_AHCI_PLATFORM help But the question is if we should keep these ancient targets in the tree. I am happy to send this patch but it should go via PPC tree. Or are you happy to apply it to your tree? Thanks, Michal