Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:41:05 -0700 | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mfd: ab8500: update kconfig for ab8500 core driver |
| |
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:12:33 +0200 Arun MURTHY wrote:
[resending, first time bounced for some reason]
> Hi Randy, > > > On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 16:53:43 +0530 Arun Murthy wrote: > > > > > This patch add a dependancy for ab8500-core driver so as to depend on > > > u8500 platform. > > > > > > This patch also fixes the build issues(powerpc_allyesconfig) for the > > > patch 03f582a93ecca6e9584b622570022abf08ed03ec (misc: Add ab8500 pwm > > > driver) > > > > Please list build errors/warnings that are fixed in your patch > > description. > > > Please find the build error log below (http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg1083549.html) > > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `__crc_pwm_free': > (*ABS*+0x24ba6d1e): multiple definition of `__crc_pwm_free' > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `.pwm_free': > (.text+0x1ab3c): multiple definition of `.pwm_free' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.text+0x2620c): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `__crc_pwm_request': > (*ABS*+0xc1f4ec93): multiple definition of `__crc_pwm_request' > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `__crc_pwm_enable': > (*ABS*+0x9d09808d): multiple definition of `__crc_pwm_enable' > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `.pwm_enable': > (.text+0x1abc8): multiple definition of `.pwm_enable' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.text+0x26278): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `.pwm_request': > (.text+0x1a774): multiple definition of `.pwm_request' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.text+0x2604c): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `pwm_config': > (.opd+0x1ce0): multiple definition of `pwm_config' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.opd+0x3000): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `pwm_free': > (.opd+0x1d28): multiple definition of `pwm_free' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.opd+0x2fd0): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `pwm_request': > (.opd+0x1cf8): multiple definition of `pwm_request' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.opd+0x2f58): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `__crc_pwm_disable': > (*ABS*+0xb0493b18): multiple definition of `__crc_pwm_disable' > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `.pwm_disable': > (.text+0x1aa24): multiple definition of `.pwm_disable' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.text+0x2613c): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `pwm_enable': > (.opd+0x1d40): multiple definition of `pwm_enable' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.opd+0x2fe8): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `.pwm_config': > (.text+0x1a648): multiple definition of `.pwm_config' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.text+0x26358): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `pwm_disable': > (.opd+0x1d10): multiple definition of `pwm_disable' > drivers/misc/built-in.o:(.opd+0x2fb8): first defined here > drivers/mfd/built-in.o: In function `__crc_pwm_config': > (*ABS*+0xc23f5b9): multiple definition of `__crc_pwm_config
I don't know what the __crc_* symbols are (I can't find them anywhere).
The other functions (pwm_config, pwm_free, pwm_request, pwm_disable, pwm_enable) exist in multiple places. This is not good. They are very generically named. The instances of these that are provided by platform code are OK (these):
./include/linux/pwm.h:19:int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns); ./arch/arm/plat-pxa/pwm.c:64:int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns) ./arch/arm/plat-pxa/pwm.c:101:EXPORT_SYMBOL(pwm_config); ./arch/arm/plat-samsung/pwm.c:194:int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns) ./arch/arm/plat-samsung/pwm.c:281:EXPORT_SYMBOL(pwm_config); ./arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c:55:int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns) ./arch/arm/plat-mxc/pwm.c:114:EXPORT_SYMBOL(pwm_config); ./arch/mips/jz4740/pwm.c:94:int pwm_config(struct pwm_device *pwm, int duty_ns, int period_ns)
but the instances of these that are defined in drivers/mfd/twl6030-pwm.c should not be named so generically.
Changing (Fixing) the function names in twl6030-pwm.c should fix the build problem that you reported, I think. And it will still allow the ab8500 driver to be built on other platforms, which is what we prefer when that is possible.
> > This patch will certainly keep i386 builds from failing, like I saw > > yesterday. However, since this driver uses some spi_*() functions, > > it should also depend on SPI_MASTER IMO. > > See this patch: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/14/412 > > > I saw your patch for fixing the same @ (http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg1083970.html) > Hence I have'nt included this.
--- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
| |