Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 May 2023 13:20:52 +0700 | From | Bagas Sanjaya <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf/arm-cmn: fix compilation issue |
| |
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 09:29:30AM +0800, liming.wu@jaguarmicro.com wrote: > From: Liming Wu <liming.wu@jaguarmicro.com> > > This patch is used to fix following compilation issue with legacy gcc > and define variables at the beginning of the function
What GCC version?
> > error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 or C11 mode > 2098 | for (int p = 0; p < CMN_MAX_PORTS; p++) > > Signed-off-by: Liming Wu <liming.wu@jaguarmicro.com> > --- > drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c | 13 ++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c > index 47d359f72957..2299fcde5b4a 100644 > --- a/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c > +++ b/drivers/perf/arm-cmn.c > @@ -2009,8 +2009,11 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn, unsigned int rgn_offset) > u16 child_count, child_poff; > u32 xp_offset[CMN_MAX_XPS]; > u64 reg; > - int i, j; > + int i, j, p; > size_t sz; > + void __iomem *xp_region; > + struct arm_cmn_node *xp; > + unsigned int xp_ports; > > arm_cmn_init_node_info(cmn, rgn_offset, &cfg); > if (cfg.type != CMN_TYPE_CFG) > @@ -2067,9 +2070,9 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn, unsigned int rgn_offset) > cmn->dns = dn; > cmn->dtms = dtm; > for (i = 0; i < cmn->num_xps; i++) { > - void __iomem *xp_region = cmn->base + xp_offset[i]; > - struct arm_cmn_node *xp = dn++; > - unsigned int xp_ports = 0; > + xp_region = cmn->base + xp_offset[i]; > + xp = dn++; > + xp_ports = 0; > > arm_cmn_init_node_info(cmn, xp_offset[i], xp); > /* > @@ -2095,7 +2098,7 @@ static int arm_cmn_discover(struct arm_cmn *cmn, unsigned int rgn_offset) > * from this, since in that case we will see at least one XP > * with port 2 connected, for the HN-D. > */ > - for (int p = 0; p < CMN_MAX_PORTS; p++) > + for (p = 0; p < CMN_MAX_PORTS; p++) > if (arm_cmn_device_connect_info(cmn, xp, p)) > xp_ports |= BIT(p); >
Is above manually tracking xp* variables?
I'm confused...
-- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |