Re: [PATCH v3] cpufreq: exynos: Fix the compile error

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 05/17/14 08:37, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On 17.05.2014 01:26, Kukjin Kim wrote:
On 05/16/14 20:07, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 16 May 2014 15:48, Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>   wrote:
Commit 7da83a80 ("ARM: EXYNOS: Migrate Exynos specific macros from
plat to mach") which lands in samsung tree causes build breakage
for cpufreq-exynos like following:

drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c: In function 'exynos_cpufreq_probe':
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:166:2: error: implicit declaration
of function 'soc_is_exynos4210'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:168:2: error: implicit declaration
of function 'soc_is_exynos4412'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c:170:2: error: implicit declaration
of function 'soc_is_exynos5250'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c: In function
'exynos4x12_set_clkdiv':
drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c:118:2: error: implicit
declaration of function 'soc_is_exynos4212'
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
make[2]: *** [drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [drivers/cpufreq] Error 2

Blank line here..

This fixes above error with getting SoC information via
of_machine_is_compatible() instead of soc_is_exynosXXXX().

Signed-off-by: Jonghwan Choi<jhbird.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c     |   20 +++++++++++++++++---
   drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.h     |    8 ++++++++
   drivers/cpufreq/exynos4x12-cpufreq.c |   11 ++++-------
   3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
index f99cfe2..9aecffef 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/exynos-cpufreq.c
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
   #include<linux/regulator/consumer.h>
   #include<linux/cpufreq.h>
   #include<linux/platform_device.h>
+#include<linux/of.h>

   #include<plat/cpu.h>

@@ -163,11 +164,24 @@ static int exynos_cpufreq_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
          if (!exynos_info)
                  return -ENOMEM;

-       if (soc_is_exynos4210())
+       if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
+               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
+       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
+               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
+       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
+               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;

4412 ?

Yes, I will fix when I apply.

+       } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
+               exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
+       } else {
+               pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
+               return -ENODEV;
+       }
+
+       if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4210)
                  ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
-       else if (soc_is_exynos4212() || soc_is_exynos4412())
+       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4212 ||
exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_4412)
                  ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
-       else if (soc_is_exynos5250())
+       else if (exynos_info->type == EXYNOS_SOC_5250)
                  ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
          else
                  return 0;

Do this in the first if/else only..

Probably, you mean following in above?

-       if (soc_is_exynos4210())

I've applied this with fixing typo you mentioned just now, if any
concerns, please kindly let me know.

I think Viresh meant merging the two if/else blocks together, as follows:

	if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4210")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4210;
		ret = exynos4210_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4212")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4212;
		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos4412")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_4412;
		ret = exynos4x12_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else if (of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5250")) {
		exynos_info->type = EXYNOS_SOC_5250;
		ret = exynos5250_cpufreq_init(exynos_info);
	} else {
		pr_err("%s: Unknown SoC type\n", __func__);
		return -ENODEV;
	}

Yeah, I just now realized same thing :(

looks better, the SoC type is only used for 4212/4412 in other place though...I will modify as per Viresh's suggestion.

Thanks,
Kukjin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Devel]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux