On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 04:56:29PM +0530, Nishad Kamdar wrote:
> This switches the flexfb.c to use GPIO descriptors
> rather than numerical gpios.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nishad Kamdar <nishadkamdar@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/fbtft/flexfb.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/flexfb.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/flexfb.c
> index 2af474469e7d..c5fa59105a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/flexfb.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/flexfb.c
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> #include <linux/vmalloc.h>
> -#include <linux/gpio.h>
> +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/spi/spi.h>
> #include <linux/delay.h>
>
> @@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ static int flexfb_verify_gpios_dc(struct fbtft_par *par)
> {
> fbtft_par_dbg(DEBUG_VERIFY_GPIOS, par, "%s()\n", __func__);
>
> - if (par->gpio.dc < 0) {
> + if (!par->gpio.dc) {
> dev_err(par->info->device,
> "Missing info about 'dc' gpio. Aborting.\n");
> return -EINVAL;
We changed par->gpio.c from an int to a pointer in patch 1 so we have
to update all the checks as well in the same patch. Otherwise it breaks
`git bisect`.
(I don't know this code well. But it just feels like it has to be
breaking git bisect just from from glancing at the patches. Perhaps I
have misunderstood).
regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
