On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 9:39 AM Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 07:06:09AM +0000, Wei Yongjun wrote:
> > Fixes the following sparse warning:
> >
> > drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra124-dfll-fcpu.c:244:18: warning:
> > symbol 'tegra210_cpu_cvb_tables' was not declared. Should it be static?
> >
> > Fixes: 2b2dbc2f94e5 ("clk: tegra: dfll: add CVB tables for Tegra210")
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra124-dfll-fcpu.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> ARM SoC maintainers,
>
> This fixes a sparse warning introduced in the tegra-for-5.1-clk pull
> request that you pulled last week. Do you want me to send you another
> pull request (perhaps give it a few more days in case other fixes are
> going to show up) or would you rather apply this directly?
>
> In the latter case, here's a link to patchwork:
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1043804/
>
> and this is:
>
> Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx>
Applied to arm/drivers, thanks!
>
> In the meantime, I'll go and improve my build scripts to run sparse as
> well. I used to do that but then removed it again because it was so
> noisy that it was impossible to filter out the Tegra-specific bits. I
> wonder if I could do something like have the build scripts build the
> branch base first, without sparse checking, and then fast-forward to the
> branch head and build again with sparse checking enabled. That way I
> should only be seeing the sparse results for code that was modified in
> the branch.
I should also restart my regular testing to find regressions, I'm
currently not doing any regular builds but rely on the bots.
Arnd
