Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1244939 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-10-12 19:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-10-13 06:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-10-12 19:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-10-12 19:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_* Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> - 2015-10-13 06:20 +0200
| From | Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-12 19:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: OMAP: Change all cpu_is_* occurences to soc_is_* |
| Message-ID | <qiOVr-5wm-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
* Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [150901 17:24]: > > > On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:33 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >* Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [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. Thanks, Tony -- 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/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-12 19:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qiP58-5HG-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1244939 |
* Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [151012 10:17]: > * Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [150901 17:24]: > > > > > > On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:33 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > >* Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [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. 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. And then you can repost, please include what all was tested. Thanks, Tony -- 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/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-10-13 06:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qiZe9-3H1-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1244943 |
On Monday 12 October 2015 10:59 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [151012 10:17]: >> * Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [150901 17:24]: >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:33 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>>> * Keerthy <a0393675@ti.com> [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 > -- 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/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web