On 12/07/2015 02:40 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja <architt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 12/07/2015 02:15 PM, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Mon, 07 Dec 2015, Archit Taneja <architt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
On 11/30/2015 06:15 PM, kbuild test robot wrote:
Hi Archit,
[auto build test ERROR on: v4.4-rc3]
[also build test ERROR on: next-20151127]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Archit-Taneja/drm-dsi-DSI-for-devices-with-different-control-bus/20151130-200725
config: x86_64-allyesdebian (attached as .config)
reproduce:
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
make ARCH=x86_64
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c: In function 'of_mipi_dsi_device_add':
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dsi.c:168:6: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_modalias_node' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
if (of_modalias_node(node, info.type, sizeof(info.type)) < 0) {
Any suggestions on how to fix this? Is it ok to make DRM_MIPI_DSI
depend on CONFIG_OF?
Please don't.
Just curious, how did x86 use DSI if the only way to create DSI devices
until now was via DT?
Oh, you want the gory details... we use the DSI code as a library for
abstraction and helpers, without actually creating or registering the
devices.
Okay, got it. I'll go with the IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) approach.
Humble request: Next time if I share something that doesn't make sense,
please reply with something more than a "Please don't". That just sounds
condescending and doesn't really help me with my cause either.
Thanks,
Archit
BR,
Jani.
Archit
BR,
Jani.
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
