From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <hidden> Date: 2021-09-22 08:44:59
g5_phy_disable_cpu1() is used outside of platforms/powermac/feature.c,
so it should have a declaration to fix W=1 warning:
arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c:1533:6:
error: no previous prototype for ‘g5_phy_disable_cpu1’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/pmac_feature.h | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <hidden> Date: 2021-09-22 08:44:57
The of_irq_parse_oldworld() does not modify passed device_node so make
it a pointer to const for safety.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/pic.c | 2 +-
include/linux/of_irq.h | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Le 22/09/2021 à 10:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski a écrit :
g5_phy_disable_cpu1() is used outside of platforms/powermac/feature.c,
so it should have a declaration to fix W=1 warning:
arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c:1533:6:
error: no previous prototype for ‘g5_phy_disable_cpu1’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
While you are at it, can you clean it up completely, that is remove the
declaration in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/smp.c ?
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <hidden> Date: 2021-09-22 14:10:30
On 22/09/2021 15:52, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 22/09/2021 à 10:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski a écrit :
quoted
g5_phy_disable_cpu1() is used outside of platforms/powermac/feature.c,
so it should have a declaration to fix W=1 warning:
arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/feature.c:1533:6:
error: no previous prototype for ‘g5_phy_disable_cpu1’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
While you are at it, can you clean it up completely, that is remove the
declaration in arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/smp.c ?
Sure, I'll send a v2. Thanks for pointing this out.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <hidden> Date: 2021-09-22 14:12:22
On 22/09/2021 15:55, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 22/09/2021 à 10:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski a écrit :
quoted
The of_irq_parse_oldworld() does not modify passed device_node so make
it a pointer to const for safety.
AFAIKS this patch is unrelated to previous one so you should send them
out separately instead of sending as a series.
The relation it's a series of bugfixes. Although they can be applied
independently, having a series is actually very useful - you run "b4 am"
on one message ID and get everything. The same with patchwork, if you
use that one.