There's a (rather subtle) typo in "CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADV80X_MODULE". Fix it
once and for all by using IS_ENABLED(), which is designed to avoid
issues like this.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]>
---
0) Untested! And this needs build- and runtime testing, especially for
the MODULE case!
1) There are many lines that might be converted to IS_ENABLED() in this
file. I'm not sure if and how that should be done.
arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c b/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
index 95114ed..1872d15 100644
--- a/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
+++ b/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
@@ -985,7 +985,7 @@ static struct spi_board_info bfin_spi_board_info[] __initdata = {
},
#endif
-#if defined(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADAV80X) || defined(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADV80X_MODULE)
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADAV80X)
{
.modalias = "adav801",
.max_speed_hz = 3125000, /* max spi clock (SCK) speed in HZ */
--
1.7.11.7
[Replaced previous maintainer and list with current maintainer and
list.]
On Fri, 2013-03-08 at 13:06 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> There's a (rather subtle) typo in "CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADV80X_MODULE". Fix it
> once and for all by using IS_ENABLED(), which is designed to avoid
> issues like this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]>
Has someone ever looked at this trivial patch? The typo is still not
fixed in v3.14-rc2.
> 0) Untested! And this needs build- and runtime testing, especially for
> the MODULE case!
>
> 1) There are many lines that might be converted to IS_ENABLED() in this
> file. I'm not sure if and how that should be done.
>
> arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c b/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
> index 95114ed..1872d15 100644
> --- a/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
> +++ b/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
> @@ -985,7 +985,7 @@ static struct spi_board_info bfin_spi_board_info[] __initdata = {
> },
> #endif
>
> -#if defined(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADAV80X) || defined(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADV80X_MODULE)
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADAV80X)
> {
> .modalias = "adav801",
> .max_speed_hz = 3125000, /* max spi clock (SCK) speed in HZ */
Paul Bolle
Hi Paul,
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Paul Bolle <[email protected]> wrote:
> [Replaced previous maintainer and list with current maintainer and
> list.]
>
> On Fri, 2013-03-08 at 13:06 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> There's a (rather subtle) typo in "CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADV80X_MODULE". Fix it
>> once and for all by using IS_ENABLED(), which is designed to avoid
>> issues like this.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]>
>
> Has someone ever looked at this trivial patch? The typo is still not
> fixed in v3.14-rc2.
>
>> 0) Untested! And this needs build- and runtime testing, especially for
>> the MODULE case!
>>
>> 1) There are many lines that might be converted to IS_ENABLED() in this
>> file. I'm not sure if and how that should be done.
Sorry for the late reply. There are many CONFIG_xxx ||
CONFIG_xxx_MODULE things, we need a cleanup for it under all the
stamp.c and ezkit.c.
>>
>> arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c b/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
>> index 95114ed..1872d15 100644
>> --- a/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
>> +++ b/arch/blackfin/mach-bf537/boards/stamp.c
>> @@ -985,7 +985,7 @@ static struct spi_board_info bfin_spi_board_info[] __initdata = {
>> },
>> #endif
>>
>> -#if defined(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADAV80X) || defined(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADV80X_MODULE)
>> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SND_SOC_ADAV80X)
>> {
>> .modalias = "adav801",
>> .max_speed_hz = 3125000, /* max spi clock (SCK) speed in HZ */
>
>
> Paul Bolle
>
-steven
Steven,
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 18:35 +0800, Steven Miao wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Paul Bolle <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> 1) There are many lines that might be converted to IS_ENABLED() in this
> >> file. I'm not sure if and how that should be done.
> Sorry for the late reply. There are many CONFIG_xxx ||
> CONFIG_xxx_MODULE things, we need a cleanup for it under all the
> stamp.c and ezkit.c.
Should I draft a patch to do that? And should that patch include this
patch, or is this patch finally getting pushed (after some testing, that
is)?
Thanks,
Paul Bolle