From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] drivers: cpuidle: cpuidle-arm64: include asm/proc-fns.h explicitly
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 17:44:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54F09EFA.4090906@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150226182307.GD17949@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
On 02/26/2015 07:23 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 01:11:40PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:59:42PM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>> ARM64 CPUidle driver requires the cpu_do_idle function so that it can
>>> be used to enter the shallowest idle state, and it is declared in
>>> asm/proc-fns.h.
>>>
>>> The current ARM64 CPUidle driver does not include asm/proc-fns.h
>>> explicitly and it has so far relied on implicit inclusion from other
>>> header files.
>>>
>>> Owing to some header dependencies reshuffling this currently triggers
>>> build failures when CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES=y:
>>>
>>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-arm64.c: In function "arm64_enter_idle_state"
>>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-arm64.c:42:3: error: implicit declaration of
>>> function "cpu_do_idle" [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> cpu_do_idle();
>>> ^
>>>
>>> This patch adds the explicit inclusion of the asm/proc-fns.h header file
>>> to fix the build breakage and stop relying on implicit asm/proc-fns.h
>>> inclusion.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>
>>> [lp: rewrote commit log]
>>> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
>>> Tested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> v2 changes:
>>
>> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>>
>> Catalin will pick this up for -rc2, I suspect.
>
> I can merge this as long as Daniel or Rafael are fine with it.
I am wondering if asm/proc-fns.h shouldn't be directly included in
asm/cpuidle.h, otherwise each time cpuidle.h is included somewhere we
have to include proc-fns.h also.
It is not a problem for ARM64 because there is not a big number of
cpuidle drivers but for ARM32 it is not the case. I have a patchset
which put proc-fns.h inclusion directly in asm/cpuidle.h and cleanup the
drivers. For the sake of consistency between ARM/ARM64 may be it would
make sense to include in the cpuidle.h directly, no ?
>>> - Picked up
>>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-February/325523.html
>>> - Rebased against 4.0-rc1 and rewrote commit log
>>>
>>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-arm64.c | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-arm64.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-arm64.c
>>> index 39a2c62..c8bb6c5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-arm64.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-arm64.c
>>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/of.h>
>>>
>>> #include <asm/cpuidle.h>
>>> +#include <asm/proc-fns.h>
>>>
>>> #include "dt_idle_states.h"
>>>
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-27 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-25 12:59 [PATCH v2] drivers: cpuidle: cpuidle-arm64: include asm/proc-fns.h explicitly Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-02-25 13:11 ` Will Deacon
2015-02-26 18:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-02-26 21:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-27 16:44 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2015-02-27 17:16 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-02-27 17:18 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-02-27 17:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-02-27 17:54 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-02-27 18:03 ` Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54F09EFA.4090906@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.