On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 04:53:44PM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> Should the clk_devm stuff be moved someplace generic? I don't have a
> horse in this race. My only interest here is to get these configs to
> build again. :)
devm_clk_get() should not be in clkdev.c, but should be entirely separate,
a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/27/12 2:52 PM, Russell King wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 11:28:15AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
>> Commit 93abe8e4 (clk: add non HAVE_CLK routines) added shims for
>> the clk code but HAVE_CLK isn't enough. It's possible to have
>> the clk sup
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 11:28:15AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> Commit 93abe8e4 (clk: add non HAVE_CLK routines) added shims for
> the clk code but HAVE_CLK isn't enough. It's possible to have the
> clk support but not enable it. We end up with full prototypes for code
> that is never built - causi
Ugh. Ignore this one. I tested a build but just started getting build failures
on different configs. I'll look into why later this afternoon.
-Jeff
--
Jeff Mahoney
(apologies for the top post -- from my mobile)
On Aug 27, 2012, at 11:27 AM, "Jeff Mahoney"
wrote:
> Commit 93abe8e4 (clk: add n
Commit 93abe8e4 (clk: add non HAVE_CLK routines) added shims for
the clk code but HAVE_CLK isn't enough. It's possible to have the
clk support but not enable it. We end up with full prototypes for code
that is never built - causing module linking to fail later.
This patch changes the guard to use
5 matches
Mail list logo
