[PATCH] gpio/samsung: Move SoC specific codes within macro
In drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c, there are certain structures
and functions which are not getting used if the particular
CPU is not selected. These code segments are moved under CPU
specific macros to remove compilation warnings.
Signed-off-by: Tushar Behera
---
It has been build tested with s3c2410_defconfig, s3c6400_defconfig,
s5p64x0_defconfig, s5pc100_defconfig, s5pv210_defconfig and
exynos4_defconfig.
The patch has been rebased onto
Commit: gpio/samsung: correct pin configuration for S5PC100/S5PC110/EXYNOS4
on git://github.com/kgene/linux-samsung.git (next/topic-gpio-samsung)
drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c | 10 ++
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c
index b6be77a..33d62d1 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c
@@ -318,6 +318,7 @@ static unsigned samsung_gpio_getcfg_4bit(struct
samsung_gpio_chip *chip,
return S3C_GPIO_SPECIAL(con);
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_PLAT_S3C24XX
/*
* s3c24xx_gpio_setcfg_abank - S3C24XX style GPIO configuration (Bank A)
* @chip: The gpio chip that is being configured.
@@ -379,7 +380,9 @@ static unsigned s3c24xx_gpio_getcfg_abank(struct
samsung_gpio_chip *chip,
return S3C_GPIO_SFN(con);
}
+#endif
+#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_S5P6440) || defined(CONFIG_CPU_S5P6450)
static int s5p64x0_gpio_setcfg_rbank(struct samsung_gpio_chip *chip,
unsigned int off, unsigned int cfg)
{
@@ -417,6 +420,7 @@ static int s5p64x0_gpio_setcfg_rbank(struct
samsung_gpio_chip *chip,
return 0;
}
+#endif
static void __init samsung_gpiolib_set_cfg(struct samsung_gpio_cfg *chipcfg,
int nr_chips)
@@ -438,10 +442,12 @@ struct samsung_gpio_cfg s3c24xx_gpiocfg_default = {
.get_config = samsung_gpio_getcfg_2bit,
};
+#ifdef CONFIG_PLAT_S3C24XX
static struct samsung_gpio_cfg s3c24xx_gpiocfg_banka = {
.set_config = s3c24xx_gpio_setcfg_abank,
.get_config = s3c24xx_gpio_getcfg_abank,
};
+#endif
static struct samsung_gpio_cfg exynos4_gpio_cfg = {
.set_pull = exynos4_gpio_setpull,
@@ -450,6 +456,7 @@ static struct samsung_gpio_cfg exynos4_gpio_cfg = {
.get_config = samsung_gpio_getcfg_4bit,
};
+#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_S5P6440) || defined(CONFIG_CPU_S5P6450)
static struct samsung_gpio_cfg s5p64x0_gpio_cfg_rbank = {
.cfg_eint = 0x3,
.set_config = s5p64x0_gpio_setcfg_rbank,
@@ -457,6 +464,7 @@ static struct samsung_gpio_cfg s5p64x0_gpio_cfg_rbank = {
.set_pull = samsung_gpio_setpull_updown,
.get_pull = samsung_gpio_getpull_updown,
};
+#endif
static struct samsung_gpio_cfg samsung_gpio_cfgs[] = {
{
@@ -682,6 +690,7 @@ static int samsung_gpiolib_4bit2_output(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
return 0;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_PLAT_S3C24XX
/* The next set of routines are for the case of s3c24xx bank a */
static int s3c24xx_gpiolib_banka_input(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
@@ -717,6 +726,7 @@ static int s3c24xx_gpiolib_banka_output(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
local_irq_restore(flags);
return 0;
}
+#endif
/* The next set of routines are for the case of s5p64x0 bank r */
--
1.7.4.1
___
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: BUGREPORTED work item state
On 30 September 2011 13:22, Fathi Boudra wrote: > Hi Zach, > > I noticed that you introduced BUGREPORTED on Android blueprints for > the work items. > It raised a couple of questions: > 1. what does BUGREPORTED means ? When David Zinmann and I were going through each WI and closing out 11.09, a few BPs were done, except for one or two issues. These issues were bugs, so instead of filing a new WI in 11.10 we just marked the WI as BUGREPORTED and linked the bug to the 11.09. BUGREPORTED seemed to unambiguously mark a hand off between the BP tracking and the bug system. > 2. do we need to update > https://wiki.linaro.org/Process/WorkItemsHowto#Work_items_in_the_whiteboard > ? I think we should. BUGREPORTED seemed to fill a void as David and I were going through each item that the other fields didn't. For reference: TODO empty string, INPROGRESS Item is expected to be done by the end of the cycle INPROGRESS By default, this is an alias for TODO, but teams can choose to track it separately. BLOCKED Item is still expected to be done by end of cycle, but cannot move forward due to issues outside assignees control DONE POSTPONED POSTPONE item will not be done this cycle > > The whiteboard work items are parsed to update status.linaro.org so I > guess these work items are simply skipped. > Cheers, > -- > Fathi Boudra > Linaro Release Manager | Validation Project Manager > Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs > -- Zach Pfeffer Android Platform Team Lead, Linaro Platform Teams Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: debuild & no secret keys
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:20:12 -0500, Tom Gall wrote: > Hi All, > > I'm setting up a new machine and I'm guessing I must have missed a > step or a file. > > When I debuild -S -sa it's complaining about my secret key not being found. > > gpg: skipped "Tom Gall ": secret key not available > gpg: /tmp/debsign.Or3BKbui/live-build_3.0~a21-1linaro9~natty1.dsc: > clearsign failed: secret key not available > debsign: gpg error occurred! Aborting > > > Yet if I gpg -k on both a "good" machine and this new box I see the > exact same set of keys listed. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Uploading#Signing_the_package has some tips on debugging this sort of thing that may help you. Thanks, James ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
Re: debuild & no secret keys
On Sat, Oct 01, 2011, Tom Gall wrote: > >> gpg: skipped "Tom Gall ": secret key not available > >> gpg: /tmp/debsign.Or3BKbui/live-build_3.0~a21-1linaro9~natty1.dsc: > >> clearsign failed: secret key not available > >> debsign: gpg error occurred! Aborting > >> Yet if I gpg -k on both a "good" machine and this new box I see the > >> exact same set of keys listed. > > "gpg -k" lists public keys. see what "gpg -K" lists? > Yet again the same output for gpg -K on both machines. Does your key have exactly "Tom Gall " as one uid? If not, you might have to set explicitly which key id to use (-k1234ABCD); perhaps this is a config that you didn't copy over. -- Loïc Minier ___ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
