Hello, kbuild test robot <l...@intel.com> wrote on Fri, 23 Nov 2018 16:30:00 +0800:
> Hi Miquel, > > I love your patch! Yet something to improve: > > [auto build test ERROR on clk/clk-next] > [also build test ERROR on v4.20-rc3 next-20181122] > [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to > help improve the system] > > url: > https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Miquel-Raynal/Link-consumer-with-clock-driver/20181123-113833 > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux.git clk-next > config: sh-titan_defconfig (attached as .config) > compiler: sh4-linux-gnu-gcc (Debian 7.2.0-11) 7.2.0 > reproduce: > wget > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O > ~/bin/make.cross > chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross > # save the attached .config to linux build tree > GCC_VERSION=7.2.0 make.cross ARCH=sh > > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): > > drivers//clk/clkdev.c: In function 'clk_get': > >> drivers//clk/clkdev.c:209:3: error: implicit declaration of function > >> '__clk_device_link'; did you mean '__clk_free_clk'? > >> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > __clk_device_link(dev, clk); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > __clk_free_clk > drivers//clk/clkdev.c: In function 'clk_put': > >> drivers//clk/clkdev.c:217:2: error: implicit declaration of function > >> '__clk_device_unlink'; did you mean 'device_online'? > >> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > __clk_device_unlink(clk); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > device_online > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors I figured thanks to this report that this code won't compile with architectures not compliant to the common clock framework. I see there is the following block in clkdev.c. #if defined(CONFIG_OF) && defined(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) #else #endif Would you agree with me adding dummy functions in the #else section like: static inline void __clk_device_link(struct device *consumer, struct clk *clk) { return; } static inline void __clk_device_unlink(struct clk *clk) { return; } Do you want me to also declare these functions in the #if section (with the external keyword) to balance the above declarations? Thanks for your input. Miquèl > > vim +209 drivers//clk/clkdev.c > > 193 > 194 struct clk *clk_get(struct device *dev, const char *con_id) > 195 { > 196 const char *dev_id = dev ? dev_name(dev) : NULL; > 197 struct clk *clk = NULL; > 198 > 199 if (dev && dev->of_node) { > 200 clk = __of_clk_get_by_name(dev->of_node, > dev_id, con_id); > 201 if (PTR_ERR(clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER) > 202 return clk; > 203 } > 204 > 205 if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(clk)) > 206 clk = clk_get_sys(dev_id, con_id); > 207 > 208 if (!IS_ERR(clk)) > > 209 __clk_device_link(dev, clk); > 210 > 211 return clk; > 212 } > 213 EXPORT_SYMBOL(clk_get); > 214 > 215 void clk_put(struct clk *clk) > 216 { > > 217 __clk_device_unlink(clk); > 218 __clk_put(clk); > 219 } > 220 EXPORT_SYMBOL(clk_put); > 221 > > --- > 0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center > https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation
