lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] gpio: raspberrypi-ext: fix firmware dependency
Hi Linus,

On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 10:28:52AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > When the firmware driver is a loadable module, the gpio driver cannot be
> > built-in:
> >
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o: In function `rpi_exp_gpio_set':
> > gpio-raspberrypi-exp.c:(.text+0xb4): undefined reference to `rpi_firmware_property'
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o: In function `rpi_exp_gpio_get':
> > gpio-raspberrypi-exp.c:(.text+0x1ec): undefined reference to `rpi_firmware_property'
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o: In function `rpi_exp_gpio_get_direction':
> > gpio-raspberrypi-exp.c:(.text+0x360): undefined reference to `rpi_firmware_property'
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o: In function `rpi_exp_gpio_get_polarity':
> > gpio-raspberrypi-exp.c:(.text+0x4d4): undefined reference to `rpi_firmware_property'
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o: In function `rpi_exp_gpio_dir_out':
> > gpio-raspberrypi-exp.c:(.text+0x670): undefined reference to `rpi_firmware_property'
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o:gpio-raspberrypi-exp.c:(.text+0x7fc): more undefined references to `rpi_firmware_property' follow
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o: In function `rpi_exp_gpio_dir_in':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-raspberrypi-exp.o: In function `rpi_exp_gpio_probe':
> > gpio-raspberrypi-exp.c:(.text+0x93c): undefined reference to `rpi_firmware_get'
> >
> > We already have a Kconfig dependency for it, but when compile-testing, it
> > is disregarded.
> >
> > This changes the dependency so that compile-testing is only done when the
> > firmware driver is completely disabled.
> >
> > Fixes: a98d90e7d588 ("gpio: raspberrypi-exp: Driver for RPi3 GPIO expander via mailbox service")
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> Baruch, are you waiting for a fixed fix or should I apply this?
>
> It's a bit unclear from the mail chain what action I should take...

This patch fixes the issue. I think that an inline comment should be added at
least, because otherwise the dependency in incomprehensible. I also prefer the

depends on m || DEPENDENCY != m

style to express this kind of dependencies.

What do you think?

baruch

--
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.52.368.4656, http://www.tkos.co.il -

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-02 00:37    [W:0.057 / U:0.496 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site