From: Justin Waters <justin.waters@timesys.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 4/4]: arm: Define test_and_set_bit and test_and_clear bit for ARM
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 17:27:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1252099679.4786.13.camel@jjw-linux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090824091016.7be37982@marrow.netinsight.se>
Simon,
I found a slight problem with this section of the patch:
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 03:10 -0400, Simon Kagstrom wrote:
> diff --git a/include/asm-arm/bitops.h b/include/asm-arm/bitops.h
> index 854e225..3c7b00c 100644
> --- a/include/asm-arm/bitops.h
> +++ b/include/asm-arm/bitops.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
>
> #ifdef __KERNEL__
>
> +#include <asm/proc/system.h>
> +
It causes a compiler error on the arm926ejs platform:
In file included from cpu.c:34:
/home/justin/git/u-boot/include/asm/system.h: At top level:
/home/justin/git/u-boot/include/asm/system.h:71: error: expected
identifier or '(' before 'asm'
I did some digging, and it looks like set_cr() is implemented by both
asm-arm/system.h and asm-arm/proc-armv/system.h. One implements the
function as a macro, while the other uses a standard C function, hence
the weird error message. The conflict occurs in cpu/arm926ejs/cpu.c.
* cpu.c includes both common.h and asm/system.h
* common.h includes asm/bitops.h, which now includes asm/proc/system.h
There are a few other values that are defined in both files, although
they don't seem to cause any problems.
If I comment out one of the two implementations, the code compiles fine.
However, I'm not really sure what the correct fix would be. I just
wanted to let you know.
-Justin Waters
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-04 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-24 7:06 [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 0/4]: bitops cleanup and fixes Simon Kagstrom
2009-08-24 7:09 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 1/4]: Move __set/clear_bit from ubifs.h to bitops.h Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-15 20:31 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-08-24 7:10 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 2/4]: arm: Make arm bitops endianness-independent Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-15 20:34 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-08-24 7:10 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 3/4]: Define ffs/fls for all architectures Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-15 20:34 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-09-16 19:19 ` Stefan Roese
2009-09-17 6:45 ` Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-17 6:56 ` Stefan Roese
2009-09-17 7:13 ` Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-17 7:19 ` Stefan Roese
2009-08-24 7:10 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 4/4]: arm: Define test_and_set_bit and test_and_clear bit for ARM Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-04 21:27 ` Justin Waters [this message]
2009-09-06 14:59 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2009-09-07 6:26 ` Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-15 20:35 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-08-31 9:32 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v4 0/4]: bitops cleanup and fixes Simon Kagstrom
2009-09-04 20:14 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-09-05 11:37 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2009-09-06 20:50 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-09-06 23:01 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
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=1252099679.4786.13.camel@jjw-linux \
--to=justin.waters@timesys.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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