2018-12-24 17:23:31

by Qian Cai

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH -next] ACPI/IORT: fix build when CONFIG_IOMMU_API=n

rivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:880:1: error: expected identifier or '(' before '{' token
{ return NULL; }
^
drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:879:39: warning: 'iort_fwspec_iommu_ops' used but never defined
static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev);
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <[email protected]>
---
drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
index fdd90ffceb85..5d29783ee5bd 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
@@ -876,7 +876,7 @@ int iort_iommu_msi_get_resv_regions(struct device *dev, struct list_head *head)
return (resv == its->its_count) ? resv : -ENODEV;
}
#else
-static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev);
+static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev)
{ return NULL; }
static inline int iort_add_device_replay(const struct iommu_ops *ops,
struct device *dev)
--
2.17.2 (Apple Git-113)



2018-12-25 02:47:42

by Hanjun Guo

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] ACPI/IORT: fix build when CONFIG_IOMMU_API=n

Hi Qian,

Good catch, minor comments below.

On 2018/12/25 1:20, Qian Cai wrote:
> rivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:880:1: error: expected identifier or '(' before '{' token
^^
drivers

> { return NULL; }
> ^
> drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:879:39: warning: 'iort_fwspec_iommu_ops' used but never defined
> static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> index fdd90ffceb85..5d29783ee5bd 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> @@ -876,7 +876,7 @@ int iort_iommu_msi_get_resv_regions(struct device *dev, struct list_head *head)
> return (resv == its->its_count) ? resv : -ENODEV;
> }
> #else
> -static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev);
> +static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev)
> { return NULL; }
> static inline int iort_add_device_replay(const struct iommu_ops *ops,
> struct device *dev)

Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>

Lorenzo, I think this is 4.21-rc1 material if it's OK for you.

Thanks
Hanjun


2019-01-04 17:42:25

by Lorenzo Pieralisi

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] ACPI/IORT: fix build when CONFIG_IOMMU_API=n

On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 10:44:38AM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> Hi Qian,
>
> Good catch, minor comments below.
>
> On 2018/12/25 1:20, Qian Cai wrote:
> > rivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:880:1: error: expected identifier or '(' before '{' token
> ^^
> drivers
>
> > { return NULL; }
> > ^
> > drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:879:39: warning: 'iort_fwspec_iommu_ops' used but never defined
> > static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev);
> > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > index fdd90ffceb85..5d29783ee5bd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
> > @@ -876,7 +876,7 @@ int iort_iommu_msi_get_resv_regions(struct device *dev, struct list_head *head)
> > return (resv == its->its_count) ? resv : -ENODEV;
> > }
> > #else
> > -static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev);
> > +static inline const struct iommu_ops *iort_fwspec_iommu_ops(struct device *dev)
> > { return NULL; }
> > static inline int iort_add_device_replay(const struct iommu_ops *ops,
> > struct device *dev)
>
> Acked-by: Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>
>
> Lorenzo, I think this is 4.21-rc1 material if it's OK for you.

It is a bit late for -rc1 but I will send it asap, with a proper Fixes:
tag that points at the commit that introduced the typo.

Lorenzo