Le vendredi 13 janvier 2017 17:48:50 UTC+1, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Amelie DELAUNAY > wrote:
> > On 01/13/2017 04:32 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>
> >> Using the ~ operator on a BIT() constant results in a large 'unsigned
> >> long'
> >> constant that won'
On 12/01/2017 at 17:07:42 +0100, Thierry Reding wrote :
> From: Thierry Reding
>
> The ordering of includes is currently completely arbitrary, making it
> impossible to decide where to put new includes. Remove the dilemma by
> sort the include list alphabetically.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Redi
On 13/01/2017 at 16:32:52 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
> The new driver has a stray #ifdef in it that causes a build error:
>
> drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c:718:21: error: 'stm32_rtc_of_match' undeclared here
> (not in a function); did you mean 'stm32_rtc_pm_ops'?
>
> As the #ifdef serves no purpose
On 13/01/2017 at 16:32:51 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote :
> The remove function can be called at runtime for a manual 'unbind'
> operation and must not be left out from a built-in driver, as kbuild
> complains:
>
> `stm32_rtc_remove' referenced in section `.data.stm32_rtc_driver' of
> drivers/rtc/rt
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Amelie DELAUNAY wrote:
> On 01/13/2017 04:32 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>> Using the ~ operator on a BIT() constant results in a large 'unsigned
>> long'
>> constant that won't fit into an 'unsigned int' function argument on 64-bit
>> architectures, resulting in a
Hi Arnd,
On 01/13/2017 04:32 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Using the ~ operator on a BIT() constant results in a large 'unsigned long'
constant that won't fit into an 'unsigned int' function argument on 64-bit
architectures, resulting in a harmless build warning in x86 allmodconfig:
drivers/rtc/rtc-
On 13/01/2017 at 15:52:29 +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote :
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 04:32:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > -#define PWR_CR_DBP BIT(8)
> > +#define PWR_CR_DBP (u32)BIT(8)
>
> Shouldn't that have parens around it as it's no longer a simple
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 04:32:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> -#define PWR_CR_DBP BIT(8)
> +#define PWR_CR_DBP (u32)BIT(8)
Shouldn't that have parens around it as it's no longer a simple expression.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/develope
Using the ~ operator on a BIT() constant results in a large 'unsigned long'
constant that won't fit into an 'unsigned int' function argument on 64-bit
architectures, resulting in a harmless build warning in x86 allmodconfig:
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c: In function 'stm32_rtc_probe':
drivers/rtc/rtc-s
The new driver has a stray #ifdef in it that causes a build error:
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.c:718:21: error: 'stm32_rtc_of_match' undeclared here
(not in a function); did you mean 'stm32_rtc_pm_ops'?
As the #ifdef serves no purpose here, let's just remove it.
Fixes: 4e64350f42e2 ("rtc: add STM32 R
The remove function can be called at runtime for a manual 'unbind'
operation and must not be left out from a built-in driver, as kbuild
complains:
`stm32_rtc_remove' referenced in section `.data.stm32_rtc_driver' of
drivers/rtc/rtc-stm32.o: defined in discarded section `.exit.text' of
drivers/rt
Hi
Hope you are doing great.
Please go through the below Job Description, if you are comfortable please
send me your updated resume along with contact details to
*govind_ramanu...@visionisys.com
*
*Role : Java Front End Developer*
*Location : Bothell, WA*
*Duration : 12 months*
Functional
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
> From: Stephen Barber
>
> The EC can function as a simple RT, this patch adds the RTC related
> definitions needed by the rtc-cros-ec driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Barber
> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra
> ---
> include/linux/mf
On Wed, 11 Jan 2017, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
> From: Gwendal Grignou
>
> Add cros_ec_get_event() entry point to retrieve event within functions
> called by the notifier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gwendal Grignou
> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra
> ---
> drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_p
Hi Alexandre,
> This didn't apply cleanly, please check rtc-next. I don't think I made any
> mistake
> as the issue was only in Kconfig. You probably based your patches on 4.9
> instead of 4.10-rc1.
Sorry for this inconvenience. You're right, my patches were based on 4.9 to be
tested on stm32f4
Hi Julia,
Thanks for the review, I prepare a fix for this warning.
Amelie
> -Original Message-
> From: Julia Lawall [mailto:julia.law...@lip6.fr]
> Sent: vendredi 13 janvier 2017 06:43
> To: Amelie DELAUNAY
> Cc: Alexandre Belloni ; Mathieu
> Poirier ; rtc-linux@googlegroups.com; kbuild
16 matches
Mail list logo
