On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/26/16 23:39, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Changes since 20160624: >> > > on i386, when CONFIG_OF is not enabled ... > but OF_GPIO is enabled due to this in drivers/gpio/Kconfig: > > config OF_GPIO > def_bool y > depends on OF || COMPILE_TEST > > (above from commit 1e4a80640338924b9f9fd7a121ac31d08134410a > from Alexander Stein <alexanders83@xxxxxx>) > > > ../drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-iproc-gpio.c:381:20: error: 'pinconf_generic_dt_node_to_map_pin' undeclared here (not in a function) > ../drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-cygnus-mux.c:739:20: error: 'pinconf_generic_dt_node_to_map_group' undeclared here (not in a function) > ../drivers/pinctrl/bcm/pinctrl-nsp-gpio.c:365:20: error: 'pinconf_generic_dt_node_to_map_pin' undeclared here (not in a function) > > because that function is only present when CONFIG_OF is enabled. > > > Also, why does that commit (1e4a80640338924b9f9fd7a121ac31d08134410a) > not have any other S-O-B lines in it? like whoever merged it? I merged it I think, Alex made a long series enabling compile testing and I started to cherry-pick the first commits to let them trickle in. I was worried about it because some of the patches caused severe build problems on some archs. It's a bit tricky to know what to do here: we want compile coverage to get proper testing, when we turn it on we get regressions, so trying to improve things make things break and it becomes a vicious circle of trouble. I don't know what the biggest pain is ... I don't really see the conclusion of this discussion thread, whether I should revert the patch or not? For fixes or next? Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
