Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (staging related)
From: Stephen Rothwell <hidden>
Date: 2011-06-23 00:35:16
Also in:
lkml
Attachments
- (unnamed) [application/pgp-signature] 490 bytes
From: Stephen Rothwell <hidden>
Date: 2011-06-23 00:35:16
Also in:
lkml
Hi Greg, On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:14:48 -0700 Greg KH [off-list ref] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 02:21:55PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:quoted
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:34:23 -0700 Greg KH [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 04:09:38PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:quoted
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:05:48 +1000 Stephen Rothwell [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
No, I still get these: In file included from drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/addi_apci_035.c:7:0: drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/addi-data/addi_common.c: In function 'i_ADDI_Attach': drivers/staging/comedi/drivers/addi-data/addi_common.c:2765:7: error: implicit declaration of function 'virt_to_bus' virt_to_bus is only defined for 32 bit powerpc (not 64 bit) (and maybe not at all on some architectures e.g. sparc). From Documentation/DMA-API-HOWTO.txt: "All drivers should be using these interfaces with no exceptions. It is planned to completely remove virt_to_bus() and bus_to_virt() as they are entirely deprecated. Some ports already do not provide these as it is impossible to correctly support them."Drivers that use virt_to_bus should Kconfig depend on VIRT_TO_BUS.Ah, I missed that, sorry. I'll go make that change as well.Ping?Sorry, been swamped with other work, I'll get to this soon...
ping?
With a very relative value of soon.
Yeah, I understand busy ... but this is a simple patch, rigth? -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/