On 03/10/18 02:24, Spencer Olson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 6:16 PM Spencer Olson <olsonse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 11:32 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:17:19AM -0600, Spencer E. Olson wrote:
[snip]
diff --git a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/ni_mio_common.c b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/ni_mio_common.c
index 4dee2fc37aed..4d0d0621780e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/ni_mio_common.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/ni_mio_common.c
@@ -4980,7 +4980,10 @@ static int ni_valid_rtsi_output_source(struct comedi_device *dev,
case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_G_SRC0:
case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_G_GATE0:
case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_RGOUT0:
- case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_RTSI_BRD_0:
+ case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_RTSI_BRD(0):
+ case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_RTSI_BRD(1):
+ case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_RTSI_BRD(2):
+ case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_RTSI_BRD(3):
return 1;
case NI_RTSI_OUTPUT_RTSI_OSC:
return (devpriv->is_m_series) ? 1 : 0;
@@ -5001,11 +5004,18 @@ static int ni_set_rtsi_routing(struct comedi_device *dev,
devpriv->rtsi_trig_a_output_reg |= NISTC_RTSI_TRIG(chan, src);
ni_stc_writew(dev, devpriv->rtsi_trig_a_output_reg,
NISTC_RTSI_TRIGA_OUT_REG);
- } else if (chan < 8) {
+ } else if (chan < NISTC_RTSI_TRIG_NUM_CHAN(devpriv->is_m_series)) {
devpriv->rtsi_trig_b_output_reg &= ~NISTC_RTSI_TRIG_MASK(chan);
devpriv->rtsi_trig_b_output_reg |= NISTC_RTSI_TRIG(chan, src);
ni_stc_writew(dev, devpriv->rtsi_trig_b_output_reg,
NISTC_RTSI_TRIGB_OUT_REG);
+ } else if (chan != NISTC_RTSI_TRIG_OLD_CLK_CHAN) {
+ /* probably should never reach this, since the
+ * ni_valid_rtsi_output_source above errors out if chan is too
+ * high
+ */
While you're fixing it, could that be changed to the usual block comment
format?
+ dev_err(dev->class_dev, "%s: unknown rtsi channel\n", __func__);
This patch breaks the build very badly. Always test-build your patches
at the very least :(
greg k-h
I have been test building this with at least a fairly recent
staging-next rebase (rebase a week or two ago). I'll rebase again and
check this out....
So the problem had been that I had been compiling the entire time with
my other patch set that I recently have just submitted. When I split
this patch off from that patch set, I had neglected to compile with it
by itsself. The issue was a forgotten "{" at the beginning of the
last if statement.
Should I resubmit this patch and the entire patch set from earlier
today, each separately?
The patch set from today titled "device-global identifiers and routes
introduced" _does_ depend on this patch that was missing the
brace--this is indicated in the patch notes as requested by Ian.
Hmm yes, it appears patch 07/13 fixes this one, as well as depending on it!
Personally, I'd be inclined to combine them into a single series of 14
patches.
I did just check to make sure that I had not made the same mistake on
the other patch set submitted earlier that was titled: "Add facility
to directly query subdevice timing". That patch set is fine as is and
did not depend on any of the other patches I had been working on.
--
-=( Ian Abbott <abbotti@xxxxxxxxx> || Web: www.mev.co.uk )=-
-=( MEV Ltd. is a company registered in England & Wales. )=-
-=( Registered number: 02862268. Registered address: )=-
-=( 15 West Park Road, Bramhall, STOCKPORT, SK7 3JZ, UK. )=-
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
