The newly added DRM_HDLCD driver tries to select DMA_CMA, but that is
not necessarily possible, as not all configurations contain HAVE_DMA_CONTIGUOUS:
warning: (DRM_HDLCD) selects DMA_CMA which has unmet direct dependencies (HAVE_DMA_CONTIGUOUS && CMA)
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dma_alloc_from_contiguous':
:(.text+0x1dee00): undefined reference to `cma_alloc'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dma_release_from_contiguous':
:(.text+0x1dee24): undefined reference to `cma_release'
This removes the 'select' statement. It is not needed because CMA is meant
to transparently change the behavior of dma_alloc_coherent to make it succeed
for larger allocations, but there is no actual build-time dependency, and
the driver can still work without CMA in many cases.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 1561e558334d ("drm: Add support for ARM's HDLCD controller.")
---
Found on ARM randconfig builds with yesterday's linux-next
The hdlcd driver has no build-time dependency on the SCPI clock
and the bogus 'select' causes a warning when SCPI is disabled:
warning: (DRM_HDLCD) selects COMMON_CLK_SCPI which has unmet direct dependencies (COMMON_CLK && (ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL || COMPILE_TEST))
This removes the select statement.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
Found two more bugs in the same driver, so this is now a patch series
The hdlcd_pm_suspend and hdlcd_pm_resume are intentionally unused
when CONFIG_PM is not set in this driver, and we get a compiler warning
for this:
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:521:12: warning: 'hdlcd_pm_suspend' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:536:12: warning: 'hdlcd_pm_resume' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
This adds a __maybe_unused annotation for the two functions, to let
the compiler know this is the intended behavior. This is better than
an #ifdef as it improves the compile time coverage of the code and it
looks nicer.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD is a tristate option that depends on the boolean
CONFIG_DRM_ARM, which in turn depends on the tristate CONFIG_DRM.
The effect of this is that a configuration with CONFIG_DRM=m
and CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD=y can be chosen, but won't link because the
DRM core symbols are not reachable from builtin code:
drivers/built-in.o: In function `hdlcd_drm_unbind':
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:445: undefined reference to `drm_fbdev_cma_fini'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:448: undefined reference to `drm_kms_helper_poll_fini'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:450: undefined reference to `drm_vblank_cleanup'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:452: undefined reference to `drm_irq_uninstall'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:460: undefined reference to `drm_mode_config_cleanup'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:461: undefined reference to `drm_dev_unregister'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:462: undefined reference to `drm_dev_unref'
...
This adds another dependency on CONFIG_DRM to enforce that DRM_HDLCD
cannot be builtin if DRM is not.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
Ok, I found yet another one after a few hundred extra randconfig builds
on today's next. Let me know if you'd rather have the three Kconfig
changes combined into a single patch, it's starting to get ridiculous.
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 11:04:07PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD is a tristate option that depends on the boolean
CONFIG_DRM_ARM, which in turn depends on the tristate CONFIG_DRM.
The effect of this is that a configuration with CONFIG_DRM=m
and CONFIG_DRM_HDLCD=y can be chosen, but won't link because the
DRM core symbols are not reachable from builtin code:
drivers/built-in.o: In function `hdlcd_drm_unbind':
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:445: undefined reference to `drm_fbdev_cma_fini'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:448: undefined reference to `drm_kms_helper_poll_fini'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:450: undefined reference to `drm_vblank_cleanup'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:452: undefined reference to `drm_irq_uninstall'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:460: undefined reference to `drm_mode_config_cleanup'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:461: undefined reference to `drm_dev_unregister'
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:462: undefined reference to `drm_dev_unref'
...
This adds another dependency on CONFIG_DRM to enforce that DRM_HDLCD
cannot be builtin if DRM is not.
Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like
a completely superfluous option to me. I don't think we've ever had the
equivalent of "vendor" Kconfig options in DRM, and I don't see why we'd
need to start now. If ARM was going to add another driver it can simply
have a separate Kconfig entry. There should be no need to select the
vendor option first.
Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20160104/2937e3ba/attachment.sig>
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 03:39:17PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
The hdlcd_pm_suspend and hdlcd_pm_resume are intentionally unused
when CONFIG_PM is not set in this driver, and we get a compiler warning
for this:
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:521:12: warning: 'hdlcd_pm_suspend' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/hdlcd_drv.c:536:12: warning: 'hdlcd_pm_resume' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
This adds a __maybe_unused annotation for the two functions, to let
the compiler know this is the intended behavior. This is better than
an #ifdef as it improves the compile time coverage of the code and it
looks nicer.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 03:38:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
The hdlcd driver has no build-time dependency on the SCPI clock
and the bogus 'select' causes a warning when SCPI is disabled:
warning: (DRM_HDLCD) selects COMMON_CLK_SCPI which has unmet direct dependencies (COMMON_CLK && (ARM_SCPI_PROTOCOL || COMPILE_TEST))
This removes the select statement.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
Found two more bugs in the same driver, so this is now a patch series
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 03:09:10PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
The newly added DRM_HDLCD driver tries to select DMA_CMA, but that is
not necessarily possible, as not all configurations contain HAVE_DMA_CONTIGUOUS:
warning: (DRM_HDLCD) selects DMA_CMA which has unmet direct dependencies (HAVE_DMA_CONTIGUOUS && CMA)
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dma_alloc_from_contiguous':
:(.text+0x1dee00): undefined reference to `cma_alloc'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dma_release_from_contiguous':
:(.text+0x1dee24): undefined reference to `cma_release'
This removes the 'select' statement. It is not needed because CMA is meant
to transparently change the behavior of dma_alloc_coherent to make it succeed
for larger allocations, but there is no actual build-time dependency, and
the driver can still work without CMA in many cases.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 1561e558334d ("drm: Add support for ARM's HDLCD controller.")
---
Found on ARM randconfig builds with yesterday's linux-next
On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote:
Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like
a completely superfluous option to me. I don't think we've ever had the
equivalent of "vendor" Kconfig options in DRM, and I don't see why we'd
need to start now. If ARM was going to add another driver it can simply
have a separate Kconfig entry. There should be no need to select the
vendor option first.
Fine with me too. I vaguely remembered having seen some discussion about
this, so I decided to do a minimal fix, but I agree that would be more
in line with the other drivers.
Arnd
On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 03:09:10PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
The newly added DRM_HDLCD driver tries to select DMA_CMA, but that is
not necessarily possible, as not all configurations contain HAVE_DMA_CONTIGUOUS:
warning: (DRM_HDLCD) selects DMA_CMA which has unmet direct dependencies (HAVE_DMA_CONTIGUOUS && CMA)
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dma_alloc_from_contiguous':
:(.text+0x1dee00): undefined reference to `cma_alloc'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `dma_release_from_contiguous':
:(.text+0x1dee24): undefined reference to `cma_release'
This removes the 'select' statement. It is not needed because CMA is meant
to transparently change the behavior of dma_alloc_coherent to make it succeed
for larger allocations, but there is no actual build-time dependency, and
the driver can still work without CMA in many cases.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 1561e558334d ("drm: Add support for ARM's HDLCD controller.")
Acked-by: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>
Arnd, are you going to send these corrections yourself or should I pull them
into my tree (possibly squashing them before sending the pull request to
Dave Airlie) ?
Best regards,
Liviu
quoted hunk
---
Found on ARM randconfig builds with yesterday's linux-next
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 09:39:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote:
quoted
Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like
a completely superfluous option to me. I don't think we've ever had the
equivalent of "vendor" Kconfig options in DRM, and I don't see why we'd
need to start now. If ARM was going to add another driver it can simply
have a separate Kconfig entry. There should be no need to select the
vendor option first.
Fine with me too. I vaguely remembered having seen some discussion about
this, so I decided to do a minimal fix, but I agree that would be more
in line with the other drivers.
Arnd
Arnd,
I'm OK with the whole series of Kconfig clean-up/fixes and I offer my appologies
for adding noise with my patchset. Please let me know how do you prefer to handle
them. I'm OK with merging your changes into my series before sending the pull
request to David Airlie.
Best regards,
Liviu
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
?\_(?)_/?
On Monday 11 January 2016 11:12:56 Liviu Dudau wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 09:39:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
quoted
On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote:
quoted
Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like
a completely superfluous option to me. I don't think we've ever had the
equivalent of "vendor" Kconfig options in DRM, and I don't see why we'd
need to start now. If ARM was going to add another driver it can simply
have a separate Kconfig entry. There should be no need to select the
vendor option first.
Fine with me too. I vaguely remembered having seen some discussion about
this, so I decided to do a minimal fix, but I agree that would be more
in line with the other drivers.
Arnd
Arnd,
I'm OK with the whole series of Kconfig clean-up/fixes and I offer my appologies
for adding noise with my patchset. Please let me know how do you prefer to handle
them. I'm OK with merging your changes into my series before sending the pull
request to David Airlie.
Please merge them into your tree if you have some other changes to send to him.
I just realized that these are in your own git tree at the moment, not
in drm-next. I guess that means you will rebase the whole series after -rc1 and
submit it into linux-4.6, right?
If so, just fold my fixes into your patches when you rebase.
Arnd
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 01:18:55PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 11 January 2016 11:12:56 Liviu Dudau wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 09:39:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
quoted
On Monday 04 January 2016 09:24:16 Thierry Reding wrote:
quoted
Ugh... wouldn't it be much simpler to get rid of DRM_ARM? It seems like
a completely superfluous option to me. I don't think we've ever had the
equivalent of "vendor" Kconfig options in DRM, and I don't see why we'd
need to start now. If ARM was going to add another driver it can simply
have a separate Kconfig entry. There should be no need to select the
vendor option first.
Fine with me too. I vaguely remembered having seen some discussion about
this, so I decided to do a minimal fix, but I agree that would be more
in line with the other drivers.
Arnd
Arnd,
I'm OK with the whole series of Kconfig clean-up/fixes and I offer my appologies
for adding noise with my patchset. Please let me know how do you prefer to handle
them. I'm OK with merging your changes into my series before sending the pull
request to David Airlie.
Please merge them into your tree if you have some other changes to send to him.
I just realized that these are in your own git tree at the moment, not
in drm-next. I guess that means you will rebase the whole series after -rc1 and
submit it into linux-4.6, right?
Yes, that is the plan.
If so, just fold my fixes into your patches when you rebase.
OK, will do. Repeating the question on another thread: are you OK with me carrying
the Juno .dts changes through drm-next for HDLCD and you picking up Robin Murphy's
patch? AFAIK those are the only changes at the moment until Sudeep re-submits the
Juno r2 dts changes.
Best regards,
Liviu
Arnd
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
?\_(?)_/?
On Monday 11 January 2016 12:26:44 Liviu Dudau wrote:
quoted
If so, just fold my fixes into your patches when you rebase.
OK, will do. Repeating the question on another thread: are you OK with me carrying
the Juno .dts changes through drm-next for HDLCD and you picking up Robin Murphy's
patch? AFAIK those are the only changes at the moment until Sudeep re-submits the
Juno r2 dts changes.
Is there a strong reason for it? Usually the preferred way is to merge all
dts changes through arm-soc, but we can make exceptions if necessary.
Arnd
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 02:49:10PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Monday 11 January 2016 12:26:44 Liviu Dudau wrote:
quoted
quoted
If so, just fold my fixes into your patches when you rebase.
OK, will do. Repeating the question on another thread: are you OK with me carrying
the Juno .dts changes through drm-next for HDLCD and you picking up Robin Murphy's
patch? AFAIK those are the only changes at the moment until Sudeep re-submits the
Juno r2 dts changes.
Is there a strong reason for it? Usually the preferred way is to merge all
dts changes through arm-soc, but we can make exceptions if necessary.
No strong reason, just packing the series in a logical way. I'm happy to split the
pull requests. Will send the dts changes to you then.
Best regards,
Liviu
Arnd
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
?\_(?)_/?