Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751758AbaKDRPt (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2014 12:15:49 -0500 Received: from mail-ig0-f179.google.com ([209.85.213.179]:55569 "EHLO mail-ig0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751324AbaKDRPi (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Nov 2014 12:15:38 -0500 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 17:15:32 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Heiko =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= Cc: Jingoo Han , "'Bryan Wu'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight: use of_find_backlight_by_node stub when backlight class disabled Message-ID: <20141104171532.GS17577@x1> References: <50522512.UJWUZtqLop@diego> <001101cff818$bfe149b0$3fa3dd10$%han@samsung.com> <20141104144220.GR17577@x1> <28305505.Hd0ru0QyPE@diego> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <28305505.Hd0ru0QyPE@diego> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Am Dienstag, 4. November 2014, 14:42:20 schrieb Lee Jones: > > On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Jingoo Han wrote: > > > On Tuesday, November 04, 2014 6:08 PM, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > > > On Mon, 03 Nov 2014, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2014, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > > > > > Drivers may want to search for an optional backlight even when the > > > > > > backlight class is disabled. In this case the linker would miss the > > > > > > function referenced in the backlight header. > > > > > > > > > > > > Therefore use the stub function also when the backlight class is > > > > > > disabled. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > include/linux/backlight.h | 2 +- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > Applied to Backlight -next with Jingoo's Ack. > > > > > > > > I've removed this patch, as it causes unexpected: > > > > Redefinition of of_find_backlight_by_node() > > > > > > I reproduced the same build error. > > > > > > Then, how about folding the following two patches into > > > one single patch? These two patches were already sent by Heiko Stübner. > > > > > > [PATCH] backlight: use of_find_backlight_by_node stub when backlight > > > class disabled [PATCH] backlight: extend of_find_backlight_by_node > > > stub-check to modules> > > > Then, the one single patch will do as follows. > > > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_OF > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_OF) && (defined(CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE) || \ > > > + defined(CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE_MODULE)) > > > > > > In this case, I cannot find any build errors. > > > > That's a neat trick. I didn't know you could do that. > > > > However, it's bit messy consider different formatting, or a nested > > #ifdef instead please. > > I guess it is a matter of me "not seeing the forrest for the trees", but how > would a nested ifdef look like, as this would result in 3 possible results > when for CONFIG_OF first and then for one of the BACKLIGHT_CLASS defines? > > Formatting wise, when applied both defined(CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_foo) parts > are exactly below each other, making it (hopefully) clear where the "or" is > part of. What would look better? Actually there is a better way still: #ifdef CONFIG_OF && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE) struct backlight_device *of_find_backlight_by_node(struct device_node *node); #else static inline struct backlight_device * of_find_backlight_by_node(struct device_node *node) { return NULL; } #endif -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/