Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Dec 2013 14:29:42 +0100 | From | Daniel Lezcano <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] clocksource: time-efm32: Select CLKSRC_MMIO |
| |
On 12/10/2013 02:24 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:15:11AM +0800, Axel Lin wrote: >> The time-efm32 driver uses the clocksource MMIO functions. >> Thus it needs to select CLKSRC_MMIO in Kconfig. >> >> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com> >> --- >> This fixes build error when COMPILE_TEST=y. >> drivers/built-in.o: In function `efm32_clocksource_init': >> drivers/clocksource/time-efm32.c:162: undefined reference to `clocksource_mmio_init' >> drivers/built-in.o: In function `efm32_timer_init': >> drivers/clocksource/time-efm32.c:274: undefined reference to `clocksource_mmio_readl_up' >> make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1 >> >> drivers/clocksource/Kconfig | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig b/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig >> index bdb953e..99763eb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/Kconfig >> @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ config CLKSRC_DBX500_PRCMU_SCHED_CLOCK >> config CLKSRC_EFM32 >> bool "Clocksource for Energy Micro's EFM32 SoCs" if !ARCH_EFM32 >> depends on OF && ARM && (ARCH_EFM32 || COMPILE_TEST) >> + select CLKSRC_MMIO >> default ARCH_EFM32 > I'd like to send support for arch/arm/mach-efm32 for 3.14. Formerly I > had ARCH_EFM32 select CLKSRC_MMIO, but having it here is obviously the > correct thing to do. So my possibilities are: > > a) I take this patch and apply mach-efm32 on top of it; or > b) you take it early enough for me into 3.13-rc to base mach-efm32 on > it; or
I sent the PR with this patch. If everything is ok, it should be in the next -rc.
> c) I send mach-efm32 with ARCH_EFM32 selecting CLKSRC_MMIO and drop > this select later; or > d) we life with the build failure (i.e. > drivers/clocksource/time-efm32.c:274: undefined reference to > `clocksource_mmio_readl_up' and the same for clocksource_mmio_init > in a different line) until this patch and mine come together. > > I don't like d), but don't have a clear favorite between a), b) and c). > What do you think? Probably a) is the easiest for all if there are no > merge conflicts (I don't expect any). In this case I'd need Daniel's or > Thomas' ack. > > Thanks > Uwe >
-- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |