Hello David,
here's a patch for net for the v3.8 release cycle. Randy Dunlap found a
compilation problem of the sja1000_of_platform driver on X86_32. A patch by me
fixes the problem.
regards, Marc
---
The following changes since commit 17bc14b767cf0692420c43dbe5310ae98a5a7836:
Revert "sched: Update_cfs_shares at period edge" (2012-12-14 07:20:43 -0800)
are available in the git repository at:
git://gitorious.org/linux-can/linux-can.git fixes-for-3.8
for you to fetch changes up to 27d5155f676598e461d9038eadf77bfebce48f30:
can: sja1000: fix compilation on x86 (2012-12-14 22:07:10 +0100)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Kleine-Budde (1):
can: sja1000: fix compilation on x86
drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_of_platform.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Since commit:
04df251 can: sja1000: Make sja1000_of_platform selectable and compilable on SPARC
the driver can be activated on non powerpc platform like x86 or sparc. Without
this patch the driver fails to compile on platform that don't define NO_IRQ,
like x86.
Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <redacted>
Cc: Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
---
drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_of_platform.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_of_platform.c b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_of_platform.c
index 0f59170..38d37c8 100644
--- a/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_of_platform.c
+++ b/drivers/net/can/sja1000/sja1000_of_platform.c
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static int sja1000_ofp_probe(struct platform_device *ofdev)
}
irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
- if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
+ if (irq <= 0) {
dev_err(&ofdev->dev, "no irq found\n");
err = -ENODEV;
goto exit_unmap_mem;--
1.7.10.4
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 22:33:44 +0100
quoted hunk
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static int sja1000_ofp_probe(struct platform_device *ofdev)
}
irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
- if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
+ if (irq <= 0) {
dev_err(&ofdev->dev, "no irq found\n");
err = -ENODEV;
goto exit_unmap_mem;
I don't see anything existing which says this is the proper
transformation.
There is no consistency at all for the tests of the return
value of irq_of_parse_and_map().
And if anything testing against zero is the correct thing to
do, universally.
I'm not applying this or pulling from your tree, sorry.
On 12/14/2012 10:37 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 22:33:44 +0100
quoted
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static int sja1000_ofp_probe(struct platform_device *ofdev)
}
irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
- if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
+ if (irq <= 0) {
dev_err(&ofdev->dev, "no irq found\n");
err = -ENODEV;
goto exit_unmap_mem;
I don't see anything existing which says this is the proper
transformation.
There is no consistency at all for the tests of the return
value of irq_of_parse_and_map().
Right. And the current status of NO_IRQ doesn't help much.
And if anything testing against zero is the correct thing to
do, universally.
I've looked at the implementation of irq_of_parse_and_map() (both the
generic and sparc one), they both return 0 on failure. Because there are
some arch that define NO_IRQ being not 0, sparc (0xffffffff) and arm
(-1), I though testing against <= 0 would be a good idea.
I'm not applying this or pulling from your tree, sorry.
Marc
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde |
Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 |
Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |