spi/bcm63xx: unknown CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN

spi/bcm63xx: unknown CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN

[Valentin Rothberg]

Hi Jonas,

your commit 158fcc4e050a ("spi/bcm63xx: replace custom io accessors with
standard ones") has shown up in today's Linux next tree (i.e.,
next-20150915).  

This commit adds four #ifdef blocks depending on CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN,
which is not defined in Kconfig breaking the #ifdef #else conditions.

Is there a patch queued somewhere to add this option to Kconfig?  

I found some other candidates like '__BIG_ENDIAN' which is used in other
drivers, or 'CPU_BIG_ENDIAN' which is defined for mips.  Maybe they can
be used instead.

I detected this issue witch scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py.

Kind regards,
  Valentin

Re: spi/bcm63xx: unknown CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN

[Jonas Gorski]

Hi Valentin,

On 15.09.2015 08:24, Valentin Rothberg wrote:
> Hi Jonas,
> 
> your commit 158fcc4e050a ("spi/bcm63xx: replace custom io accessors with
> standard ones") has shown up in today's Linux next tree (i.e.,
> next-20150915).  
> 
> This commit adds four #ifdef blocks depending on CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN,
> which is not defined in Kconfig breaking the #ifdef #else conditions.
> 
> Is there a patch queued somewhere to add this option to Kconfig?  
> 
> I found some other candidates like '__BIG_ENDIAN' which is used in other
> drivers, or 'CPU_BIG_ENDIAN' which is defined for mips.  Maybe they can
> be used instead.

You are right, and I had fixed this in my V2 patchset from saturday, but
appearently this wasn't fast enough.
Mark? If you can drop patches 2 to 4 that would be easiest for me, but if
you don't do rebases on your for-next branch, then I'll rewrite the
patches to apply on top of the already applied old versions and send a v3.


Jonas

Re: spi/bcm63xx: unknown CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 361 bytes --]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 09:40:30AM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:

> Mark? If you can drop patches 2 to 4 that would be easiest for me, but if
> you don't do rebases on your for-next branch, then I'll rewrite the
> patches to apply on top of the already applied old versions and send a v3.

No, please submit incremental modifications as incremental
modifications.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: spi/bcm63xx: unknown CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN

[Jonas Gorski]

On 15.09.2015 10:40, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 09:40:30AM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> 
>> Mark? If you can drop patches 2 to 4 that would be easiest for me, but if
>> you don't do rebases on your for-next branch, then I'll rewrite the
>> patches to apply on top of the already applied old versions and send a v3.
> 
> No, please submit incremental modifications as incremental
> modifications.

IS there anything I can do to avoid this happining again, like a patchwork
where I can mark my older versions as superseded? I admit I didn't expect
partial application of the (old) series.


Jonas

Re: spi/bcm63xx: unknown CONFIG_BIG_ENDIAN

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 503 bytes --]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 03:34:17PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> On 15.09.2015 10:40, Mark Brown wrote:

> > No, please submit incremental modifications as incremental
> > modifications.

> IS there anything I can do to avoid this happining again, like a patchwork
> where I can mark my older versions as superseded? I admit I didn't expect
> partial application of the (old) series.

No, not really - the main thing here was that there didn't seem to have
been any discussion about the original series.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]