From: Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux@arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_*
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:48:28 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <561C8614.8080402@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151012172941.GH23801@atomide.com>
On Monday 12 October 2015 10:59 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [151012 10:17]:
>> * Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [150901 17:24]:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:33 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>>>> * Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [150901 10:22]:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday 26 August 2015 09:29 AM, Keerthy wrote:
>>>>>> Currently apart from dra7, omap5 and amx3 all the other SoCs
>>>>>> are identified using cpu_is_* functions which is not right since
>>>>>> they are all SoCs(System on Chips). Hence changing the SoC
>>>>>> identification code to use soc_is instead of cpu_is and keeping
>>>>>> defines for cpu_is where needed. This allows us to replace the
>>>>>> rest of cpu_is usage along with other fixes as needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tony,
>>>>>
>>>>> A Gentle ping on this.
>>>>
>>>> Looks good to me for v4.4. I'll apply it after some testing
>>>> after -rc1.
>>>
>>> Thanks Tony.
>>
>> Now with the fixes finally out of the way, applying into
>> omap-for-v4.4/cleanup.
>
> Uhh actually not applying. This breaks builds quite a bit depending on
> the .config options chosen:
>
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:257:15: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap243x’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:259:8: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap44xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> ...
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:389:7: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap34xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> ...
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:389:7: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap34xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> ...
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:257:15: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap243x’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/control.c:259:8: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap44xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> ...
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:767:6: error: implicit declaration of function ‘cpu_is_omap24xx’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>
> Keerthy, can you please test this with just single SoC configurations
> and run randconfig builds on this overnight.
I will do that Tony. I tested omap2plus_defconfig and boot tested on
multiple platforms.
>
> And then we obviously need to test to make sure that this does not
> break booting on various platforms for multi SoC and single SoC
> configurations.
Okay.
>
> And then you can repost, please include what all was tested.
Sure.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tony
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-13 4:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-26 3:59 [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_* Keerthy
2015-09-01 17:19 ` Keerthy
2015-09-01 18:03 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-09-02 0:21 ` Keerthy
2015-10-12 17:17 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-10-12 17:29 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-10-13 4:18 ` Keerthy [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=561C8614.8080402@ti.com \
--to=a0393675@ti.com \
--cc=j-keerthy@ti.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).