From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: + drivers-mfd-twl-corec-wtf-isnt-this-fixed-yet.patch added to -mm tree Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 09:46:24 -0800 Message-ID: <4F4BC170.7060804@xenotime.net> References: <20120224231044.753EC10004D@wpzn3.hot.corp.google.com> <20120224233124.GM25293@ponder.secretlab.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from oproxy9.bluehost.com ([69.89.24.6]:53888 "HELO oproxy9.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754126Ab2B0RqW (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:46:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20120224233124.GM25293@ponder.secretlab.ca> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Grant Likely Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, b-cousson@ti.com, balajitk@ti.com, gg@slimlogic.co.uk, rob.herring@calxeda.com, sameo@linux.intel.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org On 02/24/2012 03:31 PM, Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 02:27:28PM -0800, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: >> >> The patch titled >> Subject: drivers/mfd/twl-core.c: wtf isn't this fixed yet?? >> has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is >> drivers-mfd-twl-corec-wtf-isnt-this-fixed-yet.patch >> >> Before you just go and hit "reply", please: >> a) Consider who else should be cc'ed >> b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well >> c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a >> reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's >> >> *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** >> >> The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated >> there every 3-4 working days > > Hi Andrew, > > I've posted patchs to fix this today, and I'll push it out to my tree > on the weekend so that Monday's linux-next will have this finally solved. Did these patches get pushed?? linux-next of 20120227 still has build errors in twl-core.c: drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1237:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'irq_alloc_descs' drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1332:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_platform_populate' on both i386 and x86_64. > g. > >> >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> From: Andrew Morton >> Subject: drivers/mfd/twl-core.c: wtf isn't this fixed yet?? >> >> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c: In function 'twl_probe': >> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1237: error: implicit declaration of function 'irq_alloc_descs' >> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1245: error: implicit declaration of function 'irq_domain_add_legacy' >> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1246: error: 'irq_domain_simple_ops' undeclared (first use in this function) >> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1246: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once >> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c:1246: error: for each function it appears in.) >> >> Cc: Benoit Cousson >> Cc: Balaji T K >> Cc: Graeme Gregory >> Cc: Samuel Ortiz >> Cc: Rob Herring >> Cc: Grant Likely >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton >> --- >> >> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff -puN drivers/mfd/twl-core.c~drivers-mfd-twl-corec-wtf-isnt-this-fixed-yet drivers/mfd/twl-core.c >> --- a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c~drivers-mfd-twl-corec-wtf-isnt-this-fixed-yet >> +++ a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c >> @@ -1234,7 +1234,7 @@ twl_probe(struct i2c_client *client, con >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> >> - status = irq_alloc_descs(-1, pdata->irq_base, nr_irqs, 0); >> + status = 0; >> if (IS_ERR_VALUE(status)) { >> dev_err(&client->dev, "Fail to allocate IRQ descs\n"); >> return status; >> @@ -1242,8 +1242,8 @@ twl_probe(struct i2c_client *client, con >> >> pdata->irq_base = status; >> pdata->irq_end = pdata->irq_base + nr_irqs; >> - irq_domain_add_legacy(node, nr_irqs, pdata->irq_base, 0, >> - &irq_domain_simple_ops, NULL); >> +// irq_domain_add_legacy(node, nr_irqs, pdata->irq_base, 0, >> +// &irq_domain_simple_ops, NULL); >> >> if (i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter, I2C_FUNC_I2C) == 0) { >> dev_dbg(&client->dev, "can't talk I2C?\n"); >> _ >> Subject: Subject: drivers/mfd/twl-core.c: wtf isn't this fixed yet?? -- ~Randy