diff mbox

Build regressions/improvements in v4.0-rc3

Message ID 4677994.NrntHOKO7A@wuerfel (mailing list archive)
State Not Applicable
Headers show

Commit Message

Arnd Bergmann March 9, 2015, 2:10 p.m. UTC 
On Monday 09 March 2015 11:56:22 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > JFYI, when comparing v4.0-rc3[1] to v4.0-rc2[3], the summaries are:
> >   - build errors: +18/-7
> 
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-pxa/idp.c: error:
> 'SMC91X_NOWAIT' undeclared here (not in a function):  => 85:47
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-pxa/idp.c: error:
> 'SMC91X_USE_32BIT' undeclared here (not in a function):  => 85:11
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-pxa/idp.c: error:
> 'SMC91X_USE_DMA' undeclared here (not in a function):  => 85:30
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-pxa/idp.c: error: unknown
> field 'flags' specified in initializer:  => 85:2
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-pxa/idp.c: error: variable
> 'smc91x_platdata' has initializer but incomplete type:  => 84:15
> 
> pxa255-idp_defconfig
> 
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-pxa/lpd270.c: error: expected
> '}' before ';' token:  => 198:43
> 
> lpd270_defconfig
> 
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/neponset.c: error:
> 'smc91c_platdata' undeclared (first use in this function):  => 271:12
> 
> neponset_defconfig
> 
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/pleb.c: error:
> 'smc91c_platdata' undeclared here (not in a function):  => 57:22
> 
> pleb_defconfig
> 
>   + /home/kisskb/slave/src/drivers/net/ethernet/smsc/smc91x.c: error:
> implicit declaration of function 'machine_has_neponset'
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]:  => 2363:2
> 
> neponset_defconfig
> 
> smc91x fallout. The lpd270_defconfig failure looks like not covered by
> "ARM: fix typos in smc91x platform data" yet?

It's not?

This should be part of that patch:


and I thought I had tested all defconfigs as well as hundreds of randconfigs
(the right ones) successfully this time.


	Arnd

Comments

Geert Uytterhoeven March 9, 2015, 2:27 p.m. UTC | #1 
Hi Arnd,

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>> smc91x fallout. The lpd270_defconfig failure looks like not covered by
>> "ARM: fix typos in smc91x platform data" yet?
>
> It's not?
>
> This should be part of that patch:
>
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/lpd270.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/lpd270.c
> @@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ static struct resource smc91x_resources[] = {
>  };
>
>  struct smc91x_platdata smc91x_platdata = {
> -       .flags = SMC91X_USE_16BIT | SMC91X_NOWAIT;
> +       .flags = SMC91X_USE_16BIT | SMC91X_NOWAIT,

Ah OK. Sorry, I thought there was a different reason.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds
diff mbox

Patch

--- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/lpd270.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/lpd270.c
@@ -195,7 +195,7 @@  static struct resource smc91x_resources[] = {
 };
 
 struct smc91x_platdata smc91x_platdata = {
-       .flags = SMC91X_USE_16BIT | SMC91X_NOWAIT;
+       .flags = SMC91X_USE_16BIT | SMC91X_NOWAIT,
 };
 
 static struct platform_device smc91x_device = {