From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.10.76.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.ozlabs.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK)) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFF12B7173 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:10:23 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <6E26D0A1-0FE5-4179-9DA8-FDF0E3D417DA@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala To: subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com In-Reply-To: <1245243097.4870.3.camel@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Subject: Re: [PATCH][Resend 2][BUILD FAILURE 04/04] Next June 04:PPC64 randconfig [drivers/net/ucc_geth.o] Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:07:47 -0500 References: <20090611033705.20842.75501.sendpatchset@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com> <1245048719.5239.10.camel@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com> <1245243097.4870.3.camel@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com> Cc: Sachin P Sant , Stephen Rothwell , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Linux-Kernel , Linuxppc-dev , Linux-Next , Nathan Lynch , Li Yang , Balbir Singh List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Jun 17, 2009, at 7:51 AM, Subrata Modak wrote: > On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 12:22 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: >> Hi Li/Nathan, >> >> On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 09:07 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: >>> Hi Nathan, >>> >>>> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 21:28 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote: >>>> Subrata Modak writes: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 11:05 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>>>> Hi Subrata, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:13:23 +0530 Subrata Modak = >>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> /* Find the TBI PHY. If it's not there, we don't = support =20 >>>>>>> SGMII */ >>>>>>> - ph =3D of_get_property(np, "tbi-handle", NULL); >>>>>>> + ph =3D (phandle *)of_get_property(np, "tbi-handle", = NULL); >>>>>> >>>>>> You don't need this cast because of_get_property() returns =20 >>>>>> "void *". >>>>> >>>>> Stephen, >>>>> >>>>> True. But without this gcc complains: >>>>> >>>>> CC [M] drivers/net/ucc_geth.o >>>>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c: In function b=18ucc_geth_probeb=19: >>>>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c:3824: warning: assignment discards =20 >>>>> qualifiers >>>>> from pointer target type >>>> >>>> ph should be declared const phandle *. Look at other uses of >>>> of_get_property. >>>> >>> >>> Ok fine. Here is a revised patch again. >>> >>> Subject: [PATCH][Resend 2][BUILD FAILURE 04/04] Next June 04:PPC64 =20= >>> randconfig [drivers/net/ucc_geth.o] >>> Reference(s): >>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/6/4/241, >>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/6/10/338, >>> >>> Fix the following build error: >>> >>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c: In function bucc_geth_probeb: >>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c:3822: error: 'ph' undeclared (first use in =20= >>> this function) >>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c:3822: error: (Each undeclared identifier is =20= >>> reported only once >>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c:3822: error: for each function it appears =20 >>> in.) >>> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c:3832: error: 'mdio' undeclared (first use =20 >>> in this function) >>> make[2]: *** [drivers/net/ucc_geth.o] Error 1 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Subrata Modak >>> --- >> >> Is there anything else to be done in this patch. If this is OK, can =20= >> this >> be applied. I am not sure, but, i find Li Yang as the maintainer for >> this in linux*/MAINTAINERS file. Kindly let me know if this patch =20 >> needs >> to be revisited for some other issue(s). > > Li, > > Any thoughts on this patch ? > > > Regards-- > Subrata > >> >> Regards-- >> Subrata >> >>> >>> --- linux-2.6.30-rc8/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c.orig 2009-06-10 =20 >>> 11:58:39.000000000 -0500 >>> +++ linux-2.6.30-rc8/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c 2009-06-10 =20 >>> 22:28:13.000000000 -0500 >>> @@ -3595,6 +3595,8 @@ static const struct net_device_ops ucc_g >>> >>> static int ucc_geth_probe(struct of_device* ofdev, const struct =20 >>> of_device_id *match) >>> { >>> + struct device_node *mdio; >>> + const phandle *ph; >>> struct device *device =3D &ofdev->dev; >>> struct device_node *np =3D ofdev->node; >>> struct net_device *dev =3D NULL; >>> >>> --- >>> Regards-- >>> Subrata >>> I'm confused by the proposed fix as we already have *mdio & *ph =20 defined in this function: static int ucc_geth_probe(struct of_device* ofdev, const struct =20 of_device_id *match) { struct device *device =3D &ofdev->dev; struct device_node *np =3D ofdev->node; struct device_node *mdio; struct net_device *dev =3D NULL; struct ucc_geth_private *ugeth =3D NULL; struct ucc_geth_info *ug_info; struct resource res; struct device_node *phy; int err, ucc_num, max_speed =3D 0; const phandle *ph; const u32 *fixed_link; const unsigned int *prop; const char *sprop; const void *mac_addr; ... - k=