From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 13:34:46 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: allow building emev2 without slave mode again
Message-Id: <20151210133446.GC1573@katana>
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="bKyqfOwhbdpXa4YI"
List-Id: <linux-sh.vger.kernel.org>
References: <2144222.LfzPx9mJ0p@wuerfel>
In-Reply-To: <2144222.LfzPx9mJ0p@wuerfel>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org


--bKyqfOwhbdpXa4YI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 02:14:49PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The emev2 driver stopped compiling in today's linux-next kernel:
>=20
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c: In function 'em_i2c_slave_irq':
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c:233:23: error: storage size of 'event' isn=
't known
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c:250:3: error: implicit declaration of func=
tion 'i2c_slave_event' [-Werror=3Dimplicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c:250:32: error: 'I2C_SLAVE_STOP' undeclared=
 (first use in this function)
>=20
> It works again if we enable CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE, but it seems wrong
> to add a dependency on that symbol:
>=20
> * The symbol is user-selectable, but only one or two (including this
>   one) bus drivers actually implement it, and it makes no sense
>   if you don't have one of them.
>=20
> * The other driver (R-Car) uses 'select I2C_SLAVE', which seems
>   reasonable in principle, but we should not do that on user
>   visible symbols.
>=20
> * I2C slave mode could be implemented in a lot of other drivers
>   as an optional feature, but we shouldn't require enabling it
>   if we don't use it.
>=20
> This changes the two drivers that provide I2C slave mode so they
> can again build if the slave mode being disabled. To do this, I
> move the definition of i2c_slave_event() and enum i2c_slave_event
> out of the #ifdef and instead make the assignment of the reg_slave
> and unreg_slave pointers optional in the bus drivers. The functions
> implementing the feature are unused in that case, so they get
> marked as __maybe_unused in order to still give compile-time
> coverage.

Thanks a lot! Making this clear and consistent was on my todo-list,
unfortunately below some other items.

Both drivers have quite orthogonal slave_irq routines. What do you think
about grouping this and the reg/unreg-calls together and compile them
conditionally on I2C_SLAVE? I think the code savings are worth it.


--bKyqfOwhbdpXa4YI
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=2yWp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bKyqfOwhbdpXa4YI--