On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 08:28:14PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 19/07/2024 08:08, Pengfei Li wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 10:49:49AM +0800, Pengfei Li wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 09:38:54AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> On 27/06/2024 10:24, Pengfei Li wrote: > >>>> IMX93_CLK_END was previously defined in imx93-clock.h to indicate > >>>> the number of clocks, but it is not part of the ABI, so it should > >>>> be moved to clk driver. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Pengfei Li <pengfei.li_1@xxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> > >>>> Notes: > >>>> Change for v2: > >>>> - Use pre-processor define to simplify code. > >>>> > >>>> drivers/clk/imx/clk-imx93.c | 2 ++ > >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> Are you sure this builds fine? If you need to define it here, it means > >>> some part of that unit file already uses the define. If so, you include > >>> the header. If you include the header, you should see fat warning. > >>> > >>> Really, people, just build your patches... > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Krzysztof > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Hi Krzysztof, > >> > >> Yes, you're right, this macro definition has indeed been used. But > >> this clk-imx93.c driver file is the only place where this macro is > >> used. So maybe it would be more appropriate to define this macro in > >> C rather than in the header file. Meanwhile, I also built my patch, > >> but no warnings were found. > >> > >> BR, > >> Pengfei Li > >> > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > I've built my patches, but no warnings were found. This C file is the only place where this macro definition is used, so why would I see fat warning? > > I could be wrong, I really thought there should be a warning of > duplicated define. But if there is none, sure, sounds good. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > Hi Krzysztof, If this patchset is ok, could you help merge it? Otherwise I won't be able to send subsequent patches. BR, Pengfei
