From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932369AbbJMESy (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:18:54 -0400 Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:53850 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932301AbbJMESx (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:18:53 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_* To: Tony Lindgren References: <1440561575-3740-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com> <55E5DE12.6070407@ti.com> <20150901180347.GO4215@atomide.com> <55E640ED.6070004@ti.com> <20151012171716.GG23801@atomide.com> <20151012172941.GH23801@atomide.com> CC: Keerthy , , , From: Keerthy Message-ID: <561C8614.8080402@ti.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:48:28 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151012172941.GH23801@atomide.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 12 October 2015 10:59 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Tony Lindgren [151012 10:17]: >> * Keerthy [150901 17:24]: >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:33 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>>> * Keerthy [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 >