Macro is not supposed to have flow control in it's
statement, remove.
Signed-off-by: Song Chen <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v2:
1, kzm9d_init and armadillo800eva_init are not compatible
with the definition of device_initcall, fixed.
---
drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
drivers/staging/board/board.h | 11 -----------
drivers/staging/board/kzm9d.c | 23 ++++++++++++++---------
3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c b/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c
index 0225234..9896c7ba 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c
@@ -78,11 +78,16 @@ static const struct board_staging_dev armadillo800eva_devices[] __initconst = {
},
};
-static void __init armadillo800eva_init(void)
+static int __init armadillo800eva_init(void)
{
- board_staging_gic_setup_xlate("arm,pl390", 32);
- board_staging_register_devices(armadillo800eva_devices,
- ARRAY_SIZE(armadillo800eva_devices));
+ if (of_machine_is_compatible("renesas,armadillo800eva")) {
+ board_staging_gic_setup_xlate("arm,pl390", 32);
+ board_staging_register_devices(armadillo800eva_devices,
+ ARRAY_SIZE(armadillo800eva_devices));
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ return -ENODEV;
}
-board_staging("renesas,armadillo800eva", armadillo800eva_init);
+device_initcall(armadillo800eva_init);
diff --git a/drivers/staging/board/board.h b/drivers/staging/board/board.h
index 5609daf..f1c233e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/board/board.h
+++ b/drivers/staging/board/board.h
@@ -32,15 +32,4 @@ int board_staging_register_device(const struct board_staging_dev *dev);
void board_staging_register_devices(const struct board_staging_dev *devs,
unsigned int ndevs);
-#define board_staging(str, fn) \
-static int __init runtime_board_check(void) \
-{ \
- if (of_machine_is_compatible(str)) \
- fn(); \
- \
- return 0; \
-} \
- \
-device_initcall(runtime_board_check)
-
#endif /* __BOARD_H__ */
diff --git a/drivers/staging/board/kzm9d.c b/drivers/staging/board/kzm9d.c
index d449a83..d48c3ef 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/board/kzm9d.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/board/kzm9d.c
@@ -10,17 +10,22 @@ static struct resource usbs1_res[] __initdata = {
DEFINE_RES_IRQ(159),
};
-static void __init kzm9d_init(void)
+static int __init kzm9d_init(void)
{
- board_staging_gic_setup_xlate("arm,pl390", 32);
+ if (of_machine_is_compatible("renesas,kzm9d")) {
+ board_staging_gic_setup_xlate("arm,pl390", 32);
- if (!board_staging_dt_node_available(usbs1_res,
- ARRAY_SIZE(usbs1_res))) {
- board_staging_gic_fixup_resources(usbs1_res,
- ARRAY_SIZE(usbs1_res));
- platform_device_register_simple("emxx_udc", -1, usbs1_res,
- ARRAY_SIZE(usbs1_res));
+ if (!board_staging_dt_node_available(usbs1_res,
+ ARRAY_SIZE(usbs1_res))) {
+ board_staging_gic_fixup_resources(usbs1_res,
+ ARRAY_SIZE(usbs1_res));
+ platform_device_register_simple("emxx_udc", -1, usbs1_res,
+ ARRAY_SIZE(usbs1_res));
+ return 0;
+ }
}
+
+ return -ENODEV;
}
-board_staging("renesas,kzm9d", kzm9d_init);
+device_initcall(kzm9d_init);
--
2.7.4
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:55:46PM +0800, Song Chen wrote:
> Macro is not supposed to have flow control in it's
> statement, remove.
>
> Signed-off-by: Song Chen <[email protected]>
>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> 1, kzm9d_init and armadillo800eva_init are not compatible
> with the definition of device_initcall, fixed.
I already applied v1, so what am I supposed to do here?
thanks,
greg k-h
?? 2021/1/4 ????5:07, Greg KH д??:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:55:46PM +0800, Song Chen wrote:
>> Macro is not supposed to have flow control in it's
>> statement, remove.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Song Chen <[email protected]>
>>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> 1, kzm9d_init and armadillo800eva_init are not compatible
>> with the definition of device_initcall, fixed.
>
> I already applied v1, so what am I supposed to do here?
In https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/, it
seems that kernel can live with the checkpatch warning messages of
"Macro is not supposed to have flow control in it's statement" in
driver/staging/board. If so, please drop the patch.
Sorry for the trouble.
Song
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 05:17:52PM +0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> 在 2021/1/4 下午5:07, Greg KH 写道:
> > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:55:46PM +0800, Song Chen wrote:
> > > Macro is not supposed to have flow control in it's
> > > statement, remove.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Song Chen <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > 1, kzm9d_init and armadillo800eva_init are not compatible
> > > with the definition of device_initcall, fixed.
> >
> > I already applied v1, so what am I supposed to do here?
>
> In https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/, it
> seems that kernel can live with the checkpatch warning messages of "Macro is
> not supposed to have flow control in it's statement" in
> driver/staging/board. If so, please drop the patch.
I'm confused, maybe I didn't apply the first patch? Am I confusing this
with a different patch for this code?
greg "I need more coffee..." k-h
Hi Chen,
Thanks for your patch!
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:55 AM Song Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
> Macro is not supposed to have flow control in it's
> statement, remove.
Why not?
>
> Signed-off-by: Song Chen <[email protected]>
>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> 1, kzm9d_init and armadillo800eva_init are not compatible
> with the definition of device_initcall, fixed.
> ---
> drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
> drivers/staging/board/board.h | 11 -----------
> drivers/staging/board/kzm9d.c | 23 ++++++++++++++---------
> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c b/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c
> index 0225234..9896c7ba 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/board/armadillo800eva.c
> @@ -78,11 +78,16 @@ static const struct board_staging_dev armadillo800eva_devices[] __initconst = {
> },
> };
>
> -static void __init armadillo800eva_init(void)
> +static int __init armadillo800eva_init(void)
> {
> - board_staging_gic_setup_xlate("arm,pl390", 32);
> - board_staging_register_devices(armadillo800eva_devices,
> - ARRAY_SIZE(armadillo800eva_devices));
> + if (of_machine_is_compatible("renesas,armadillo800eva")) {
> + board_staging_gic_setup_xlate("arm,pl390", 32);
> + board_staging_register_devices(armadillo800eva_devices,
> + ARRAY_SIZE(armadillo800eva_devices));
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> -board_staging("renesas,armadillo800eva", armadillo800eva_init);
> +device_initcall(armadillo800eva_init);
This change makes it more difficult to have multiple entries sharing
the same init function. See also the various *OF_DECLARE() macros.
Note that a similar patch was (IMHO rightfully) rejected 3 years ago:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Hi Greg,
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 10:05 AM Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 04:55:46PM +0800, Song Chen wrote:
> > Macro is not supposed to have flow control in it's
> > statement, remove.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Song Chen <[email protected]>
> >
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > 1, kzm9d_init and armadillo800eva_init are not compatible
> > with the definition of device_initcall, fixed.
>
> I already applied v1, so what am I supposed to do here?
Please revert v1, it didn't compile.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds