Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933398AbaKMRLd (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:11:33 -0500 Received: from smarthost01d.mail.zen.net.uk ([212.23.1.7]:51648 "EHLO smarthost01d.mail.zen.net.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933132AbaKMRLc (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:11:32 -0500 Message-ID: <1415898688.1787.6.camel@linaro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: pl330: Fix linker error "undefined reference to `__aeabi_uldivmod'" From: "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" To: Vinod Koul Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 17:11:28 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20141113170104.GP24582@intel.com> References: <1415896047.1787.4.camel@linaro.org> <20141113170104.GP24582@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.7-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-smarthost01d-IP: [82.69.122.217] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2014-11-13 at 22:31 +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 04:27:27PM +0000, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote: > > 32-bit ARM kernels may have a 64-bit dma_addr_t but have no > > implementation of the compiler helper for 64-bit unsigned division, > > therefore the use of the modulo operator in pl330_prep_dma_memcpy causes > > the link error "undefined reference to `__aeabi_uldivmod'" > > > > As the burst value is always a power of two we can fix the problem, and > > make the code more efficient, by replacing "% burst" with "& (burst-1)". > > > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot > > Signed-off-by: Jon Medhurst > > --- > > > > Vinod. I haven't added a 'Fixes:' line because I was unsure if the patch > > in linux-next is part of a stable branch or if the SHA1 might change > > before hitting mainline. If it stable then the line should be... > > > > Fixes: 63369d0a96dc ("dmaengine: pl330: Align DMA memcpy operations to MFIFO width") > I have applied this for now but... > > While at it and also related to Fixes, typically the fixes branch wont be > rebased before its sent to Linus and merged. But this is introduced in patch > which is sent, should I just fold it in and not cause this regression in > first place...? I have no objection to folding it in, but then doesn't that remove credit for Fengguang Wu's test system for finding and reporting errors? -- Tixy -- 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/