On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 08:57:56AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 09:34:10AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 9:07 AM Sudeep Holla [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:54:16PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:29 PM Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Applied to arm64 (for-next/smccc), thanks!

Arnd -- Sudeep's reply to you about the sysfs groups seemed reasonable to me,
but please shout if you'd rather I dropped this in order to pursue an
alternative approach.

I missed the reply earlier, thanks for pointing me to it again.

D'oh, I took your silence as "no objections". Oh well!

quoted

quoted

quoted

I'm not entirely convinced, but don't revert it for now because of that,
I assume we can find a solution.

Ok, cheers. It's on a separate branch so it's easy enough to drop if
necessary (i.e. no reverts needed). Sudeep -- please send any extra patches
on top of the branch.

Indeed, it is also last patch in the series. However if Arnd is happy
with the sysfs names, we can move to generic code later without breaking
anything.

We need not revert or drop it now. I will leave that to you or Arnd to
decide. Just that it may be too late to get acks for all the soc sysfs
drivers in time for v5.8

I am fine if you want to drop the last patch.

quoted

quoted

I liked your idea of making this generic and hardcode values if required
for other drivers. I will take a look at that/

quoted

However, please have a look at the build failure report for patch 5
and fix it if you can see what went wrong.

Any pointers for that failure ? I seem to have missed them. I pushed
branch couple of times to my tree but got build success both times.
Any specific config or compilers ?

See below for the reply from the 0day build bot to your email. It seems it
was not sent to the mailing list, but you were on Cc. Looking at it now,
the fix should be trivial.

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

drivers/firmware/smccc/smccc.c:14:13: warning: no previous prototype for function 'arm_smccc_version_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes]

void __init arm_smccc_version_init(u32 version, enum arm_smccc_conduit conduit)
^
drivers/firmware/smccc/smccc.c:14:1: note: declare 'static' if the
function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
void __init arm_smccc_version_init(u32 version, enum arm_smccc_conduit conduit)

I saw that when I applied the patches, but since the function is called from
another compilation unit (psci/psci.o), I just ignored it as we have loads
of these already and it only screams if you build with W=1.

/me confused. Do you need the fix for this warning or you are happy to ignore?

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel