[PATCH v3] OMAP: NAND: Fix static declaration warning

[PATCH v3] OMAP: NAND: Fix static declaration warning

[G, Manjunath Kondaiah]

This patch fixes sparse warning for static declaration of variable "use_dma"

drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c:114:11: warning: symbol 'use_dma' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
---
Changes since v1:
 - no logical changes, patch seperated from series based Tony's suggestion.

 drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
index 133d515..439e80d 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
@@ -111,11 +111,11 @@ static int use_dma = 1;
 module_param(use_dma, bool, 0);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(use_dma, "enable/disable use of DMA");
 #else
-const int use_dma;
+static const int use_dma;
 #endif
 #else
 const int use_prefetch;
-const int use_dma;
+static const int use_dma;
 #endif
 
 struct omap_nand_info {
-- 
1.7.0.4

[PATCH v3] OMAP2: onenand: Fix static function warnings

[G, Manjunath Kondaiah]

Fixes below sparse warning.

drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c:577:5: warning: symbol 'omap2_onenand_rephase' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
---
Changes since v1 and v2:
 - no logical changes, patch seperated from series based on Tony's suggestion.

 drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c b/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c
index 9f322f1..608cc8d 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c
@@ -574,7 +574,7 @@ static int __adjust_timing(struct device *dev, void *data)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-int omap2_onenand_rephase(void)
+static int omap2_onenand_rephase(void)
 {
 	return driver_for_each_device(&omap2_onenand_driver.driver, NULL,
 				      NULL, __adjust_timing);
-- 
1.7.0.4

[PATCH v3] OMAP2/3: NAND: Convert write/read functions to raw read/write

[G, Manjunath Kondaiah]

Following sparse warnings exists due to use of writel/w and readl/w functions.

This patch fixes the sparse warnings by converting readl/w functions usage into
__raw_readl/__raw_readw functions.

drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c:484:15: warning: symbol '__v' shadows an earlier one
drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c:484:15: originally declared here

drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c:86:9: warning: symbol '__v' shadows an earlier one
drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c:86:9: originally declared here

Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
---
Changes since v1 and v2:
 - no logical changes, patch seperated from series based on Tony's suggestion.

 drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c    |    2 +-
 drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
index 439e80d..23d2810 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
@@ -481,7 +481,7 @@ static int omap_verify_buf(struct mtd_info *mtd, const u_char * buf, int len)
 
 	len >>= 1;
 	while (len--) {
-		if (*p++ != cpu_to_le16(readw(info->nand.IO_ADDR_R)))
+		if (*p++ != cpu_to_le16(__raw_readw(info->nand.IO_ADDR_R)))
 			return -EFAULT;
 	}
 
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c b/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c
index 608cc8d..b6a2b9f 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static irqreturn_t omap2_onenand_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
 
 static inline unsigned short read_reg(struct omap2_onenand *c, int reg)
 {
-	return readw(c->onenand.base + reg);
+	return __raw_readw(c->onenand.base + reg);
 }
 
 static inline void write_reg(struct omap2_onenand *c, unsigned short value,
-- 
1.7.0.4

[PATCH v3] TWL IRQ: Fix fucntion declaration warnings

[G, Manjunath Kondaiah]

Fixes following sparse warnings for twl4030 and twl6030 irq files.

drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:783:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:863:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:873:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_chip_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?

drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:226:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:290:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
---
Changes from v2 to v3:
 - Created twl-core.h in drivers/mfd and seperated the patch from sparse fixes
   based on tony's suggestion.

Changes since v1 to v2:
 - no logical change for this patch but sparse fixes series got updated with
   review comments.

 drivers/mfd/twl-core.h    |   10 ++++++++++
 drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c |    1 +
 drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c |    2 ++
 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/twl-core.h

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.h b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8c50a55
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.h
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+#ifndef __TWL_CORE_H__
+#define __TWL_CORE_H__
+
+extern int twl6030_init_irq(int irq_num, unsigned irq_base, unsigned irq_end);
+extern int twl6030_exit_irq(void);
+extern int twl4030_init_irq(int irq_num, unsigned irq_base, unsigned irq_end);
+extern int twl4030_exit_irq(void);
+extern int twl4030_init_chip_irq(const char *chip);
+
+#endif /*  __TWL_CORE_H__ */
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c
index 097f24d..2563750 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
 
 #include <linux/i2c/twl.h>
 
+#include "twl-core.h"
 
 /*
  * TWL4030 IRQ handling has two stages in hardware, and thus in software.
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c b/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c
index 10bf228..8876b97 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c
@@ -37,6 +37,8 @@
 #include <linux/kthread.h>
 #include <linux/i2c/twl.h>
 
+#include "twl-core.h"
+
 /*
  * TWL6030 (unlike its predecessors, which had two level interrupt handling)
  * three interrupt registers INT_STS_A, INT_STS_B and INT_STS_C.
-- 
1.7.0.4

Re: [PATCH v3] OMAP: NAND: Fix static declaration warning

[Vimal Singh]

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:26 AM, G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com> wrote:
> This patch fixes sparse warning for static declaration of variable "use_dma"
>
> drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c:114:11: warning: symbol 'use_dma' was not declared. Should it be static?
>
> Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
> Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
>  - no logical changes, patch seperated from series based Tony's suggestion.
>
>  drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
> index 133d515..439e80d 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c
> @@ -111,11 +111,11 @@ static int use_dma = 1;
>  module_param(use_dma, bool, 0);
>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(use_dma, "enable/disable use of DMA");
>  #else
> -const int use_dma;
> +static const int use_dma;
>  #endif
>  #else
>  const int use_prefetch;
> -const int use_dma;
> +static const int use_dma;

I did not understand, why did it not pointed same error for 'const int
use_prefetch'?

-- 
Regards,
Vimal Singh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v3] OMAP: NAND: Fix static declaration warning

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 03:26 +0530, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
> This patch fixes sparse warning for static declaration of variable "use_dma"
> 
> drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c:114:11: warning: symbol 'use_dma' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
> Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>

I've pushed this patch to my l2-mtd-2.6.git.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v3] OMAP2/3: NAND: Convert write/read functions to raw read/write

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 03:26 +0530, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
> Following sparse warnings exists due to use of writel/w and readl/w functions.
> 
> This patch fixes the sparse warnings by converting readl/w functions usage into
> __raw_readl/__raw_readw functions.
> 
> drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c:484:15: warning: symbol '__v' shadows an earlier one
> drivers/mtd/nand/omap2.c:484:15: originally declared here
> 
> drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c:86:9: warning: symbol '__v' shadows an earlier one
> drivers/mtd/onenand/omap2.c:86:9: originally declared here
> 
> Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org

I've pushed this patch to my l2-mtd-2.6.git.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

RE: [PATCH v3] TWL IRQ: Fix fucntion declaration warnings

[G, Manjunath Kondaiah]

Hi Samuel,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org 
> [mailto:linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of G, 
> Manjunath Kondaiah
> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 3:27 AM
> To: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Samuel Ortiz; Tony 
> Lindgren; Menon, Nishanth
> Subject: [PATCH v3] TWL IRQ: Fix fucntion declaration warnings
> 
> Fixes following sparse warnings for twl4030 and twl6030 irq files.
> 
> 
If there are no further comments, can you please push this patch?

-Manjunath 

Re: [PATCH v3] TWL IRQ: Fix fucntion declaration warnings

[Samuel Ortiz]

Hi Manjunath,

On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 03:26:59AM +0530, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
> Fixes following sparse warnings for twl4030 and twl6030 irq files.
> 
> drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:783:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:863:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:873:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_chip_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:226:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:290:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
>
Patch applied, thanks.

Cheers,
Samuel.

-- 
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/

Re: [PATCH v3] TWL IRQ: Fix fucntion declaration warnings

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:06:14AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> Hi Manjunath,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 03:26:59AM +0530, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
> > Fixes following sparse warnings for twl4030 and twl6030 irq files.
> > 
> > drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:783:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:863:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:873:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_chip_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > 
> > drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:226:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:290:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> >
> Patch applied, thanks.
I didn't get the original patch, so I just now noticed the typo in the
Subject.  You might want to do s/fucntion/function/

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v3] TWL IRQ: Fix fucntion declaration warnings

[Samuel Ortiz]

Hi Uwe,

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:28:16AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:06:14AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> > Hi Manjunath,
> > 
> > On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 03:26:59AM +0530, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
> > > Fixes following sparse warnings for twl4030 and twl6030 irq files.
> > > 
> > > drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:783:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > > drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:863:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > > drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:873:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_chip_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > > 
> > > drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:226:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_init_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > > drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:290:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_exit_irq' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > >
> > Patch applied, thanks.
> I didn't get the original patch, so I just now noticed the typo in the
> Subject.  You might want to do s/fucntion/function/
Yes, I noticed as well and fixed it, thanks.

Cheers,
Samuel.

-- 
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html