Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-28 Thread Wolfram Sang
> > I think there is something wrong with an interface that makes you use > > IS_ERR_OR_NULL(). If you are calling reset_control_get_optional(), that' > > should not return an error when there is no reset controller listed > > in the device tree. We should still have a way to propagate -EPROBE_DEF

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-24 Thread Gregory CLEMENT
Arnd, Olof, Kevin, On 24/03/2014 14:33, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >>> Looping linux-next into the CC since this is the cause of the failure >>> in orion5x_defconfig there, and no point in anyone else re-doing the >>> same bisect. >> >> I sent a fix for this that hasn't been picked up yet: >> http://l

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-24 Thread Wolfram Sang
> > Looping linux-next into the CC since this is the cause of the failure > > in orion5x_defconfig there, and no point in anyone else re-doing the > > same bisect. > > I sent a fix for this that hasn't been picked up yet: > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-March/239069.h

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-24 Thread Maxime Ripard
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 12:11:24PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 21 March 2014 20:17:39 Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:49:59AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux > > > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-22 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 21 March 2014 20:17:39 Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:49:59AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:58:08AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > >> On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-22 Thread Maxime Ripard
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:49:59AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux > wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:58:08AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > >> > On Fri, Mar

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-21 Thread Paul Gortmaker
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:58:08AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:59:30PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> > > @@ -900,7 +902,8

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-10 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:58:08AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:59:30PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > @@ -900,7 +902,8 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pd) > > > exit_free_irq:

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-10 Thread Maxime Ripard
On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:59:30PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > @@ -900,7 +902,8 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pd) > > exit_free_irq: > > free_irq(drv_data->irq, drv_data); > > exit_reset: > > - if

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-07 Thread Maxime Ripard
On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 06:29:49PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > Another question is... why do we need to check pd->dev.of_node here? > > > If CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER is set, we always try to get the reset > > > controller node, so drv_data->rstc is either going to be a valid > > > pointer, o

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-07 Thread Wolfram Sang
> > Another question is... why do we need to check pd->dev.of_node here? > > If CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER is set, we always try to get the reset > > controller node, so drv_data->rstc is either going to be a valid > > pointer, or it's going to be an error pointer - neither > > reset_control_get() no

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-07 Thread Maxime Ripard
On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:59:30PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > @@ -900,7 +902,8 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pd) > > exit_free_irq: > > free_irq(drv_data->irq, drv_data); > > exit_reset: > > - if

Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-07 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux
On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:59:30PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > @@ -900,7 +902,8 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pd) > exit_free_irq: > free_irq(drv_data->irq, drv_data); > exit_reset: > - if (pd->dev.of_node && !IS_ERR(drv_data->rstc)) > + if (pd->dev.of_node && IS_EN

[PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage

2014-03-07 Thread Maxime Ripard
Commit 370136bc67c3 ("i2c: mv64xxx: Add reset deassert call"), introduced a recursive dependency, which was fixed by commit 80c69915e5fb ("i2c: mv64xxx: fix circular Kconfig dependency", that in turn, by dropping the dependency on RESET_CONTROLLER, introduced a compilation breakage whenever this op