Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the rtc tree
On Tuesday, May 31, 2016 12:52:13 PM CEST Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> After merging the rtc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> produced these warnings:
>
> In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
> drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:52:0: warning: "TRUE" redefined
> #define TRUE 1
> ^
> In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
> from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
> from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
> from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
> include/acpi/actypes.h:438:0: note: this is the location of the previous
> definition
> #define TRUE(1 == 1)
> ^
> In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
> drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:53:0: warning: "FALSE" redefined
> #define FALSE 0
> ^
> In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
> from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
> from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
> from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
> include/acpi/actypes.h:433:0: note: this is the location of the previous
> definition
> #define FALSE (1 == 0)
> ^
Thanks for the report!
> Introduced by commit
>
> fd09cc80165c ("rtc: cmos: move mc146818rtc code out of asm-generic/rtc.h")
>
> Why the hell do we have any definitions of TRUE and FALSE, anyway?
> There are a few more (I counted 4 in header files before stopping).
I've seen variations of the problem before, so when it showed up now,
I didn't think it had anything to do with my patches, sorry for not
catching it earlier.
> Hmmm, those 2 static inline functions in include/linux/mc146818rtc.h
> that reference ACPI stuff are probably to big to be inline and in a header
> file anyway, right?
They certainly are, I just couldn't come up with an obvious place
for them to go. They used to be part of asm-generic/rtc.h, which is now
gone.
An easy workaround would be to change the mwave driver to use the normal
bool type instead of its own, and that's basically a good idea regardless
of what else we do. I've submitted a patch for this.
Regarding where to put the two functions if not in the header, I looked
at the existing callers:
arch/alpha/kernel/rtc.c:mc146818_get_time(tm);
arch/alpha/kernel/rtc.c:return mc146818_set_time(tm);
arch/mn10300/kernel/rtc.c: mc146818_set_time();
arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c: mc146818_set_time(_time);
arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c: retval = mc146818_set_time();
drivers/base/power/trace.c: mc146818_set_time();
drivers/base/power/trace.c: mc146818_get_time();
drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c: mc146818_get_time(t);
drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c: return mc146818_set_time(t);
For x86, this is really easy, we can just put it into drivers/rtc/ like we
do for rtc-lib.c. This includes drivers/base/power/trace.c, which is x86
specific.
However, alpha does not always set CONFIG_RTC_LIB or CONFIG_RTC_CLASS, so
we'd have to change that first. As mentioned, this is probably a good idea,
as the CONFIG_RTC driver doesn't work reliably on some Alpha machines.
The main tricky bit is mn10300, which doesn't use RTC_LIB at all and which
does not even work with RTC_DRV_CMOS, only CONFIG_RTC, so we never enter
drivers/rtc there. We could either try to change that and use RTC_DRV_CMOS
there, or duplicate the mc146818_get_time() function on mn10300.
Arnd
Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the rtc tree
On Tuesday, May 31, 2016 12:52:13 PM CEST Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> After merging the rtc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> produced these warnings:
>
> In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
> drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:52:0: warning: "TRUE" redefined
> #define TRUE 1
> ^
> In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
> from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
> from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
> from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
> include/acpi/actypes.h:438:0: note: this is the location of the previous
> definition
> #define TRUE(1 == 1)
> ^
> In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
> drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:53:0: warning: "FALSE" redefined
> #define FALSE 0
> ^
> In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
> from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
> from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
> from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
> include/acpi/actypes.h:433:0: note: this is the location of the previous
> definition
> #define FALSE (1 == 0)
> ^
Thanks for the report!
> Introduced by commit
>
> fd09cc80165c ("rtc: cmos: move mc146818rtc code out of asm-generic/rtc.h")
>
> Why the hell do we have any definitions of TRUE and FALSE, anyway?
> There are a few more (I counted 4 in header files before stopping).
I've seen variations of the problem before, so when it showed up now,
I didn't think it had anything to do with my patches, sorry for not
catching it earlier.
> Hmmm, those 2 static inline functions in include/linux/mc146818rtc.h
> that reference ACPI stuff are probably to big to be inline and in a header
> file anyway, right?
They certainly are, I just couldn't come up with an obvious place
for them to go. They used to be part of asm-generic/rtc.h, which is now
gone.
An easy workaround would be to change the mwave driver to use the normal
bool type instead of its own, and that's basically a good idea regardless
of what else we do. I've submitted a patch for this.
Regarding where to put the two functions if not in the header, I looked
at the existing callers:
arch/alpha/kernel/rtc.c:mc146818_get_time(tm);
arch/alpha/kernel/rtc.c:return mc146818_set_time(tm);
arch/mn10300/kernel/rtc.c: mc146818_set_time();
arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c: mc146818_set_time(_time);
arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c: retval = mc146818_set_time();
drivers/base/power/trace.c: mc146818_set_time();
drivers/base/power/trace.c: mc146818_get_time();
drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c: mc146818_get_time(t);
drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c: return mc146818_set_time(t);
For x86, this is really easy, we can just put it into drivers/rtc/ like we
do for rtc-lib.c. This includes drivers/base/power/trace.c, which is x86
specific.
However, alpha does not always set CONFIG_RTC_LIB or CONFIG_RTC_CLASS, so
we'd have to change that first. As mentioned, this is probably a good idea,
as the CONFIG_RTC driver doesn't work reliably on some Alpha machines.
The main tricky bit is mn10300, which doesn't use RTC_LIB at all and which
does not even work with RTC_DRV_CMOS, only CONFIG_RTC, so we never enter
drivers/rtc there. We could either try to change that and use RTC_DRV_CMOS
there, or duplicate the mc146818_get_time() function on mn10300.
Arnd
linux-next: build warnings after merge of the rtc tree
Hi Alexandre,
After merging the rtc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
produced these warnings:
In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:52:0: warning: "TRUE" redefined
#define TRUE 1
^
In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
include/acpi/actypes.h:438:0: note: this is the location of the previous
definition
#define TRUE(1 == 1)
^
In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:53:0: warning: "FALSE" redefined
#define FALSE 0
^
In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
include/acpi/actypes.h:433:0: note: this is the location of the previous
definition
#define FALSE (1 == 0)
^
Introduced by commit
fd09cc80165c ("rtc: cmos: move mc146818rtc code out of asm-generic/rtc.h")
Why the hell do we have any definitions of TRUE and FALSE, anyway?
There are a few more (I counted 4 in header files before stopping).
Hmmm, those 2 static inline functions in include/linux/mc146818rtc.h
that reference ACPI stuff are probably to big to be inline and in a header
file anyway, right?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
linux-next: build warnings after merge of the rtc tree
Hi Alexandre,
After merging the rtc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
produced these warnings:
In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:52:0: warning: "TRUE" redefined
#define TRUE 1
^
In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
include/acpi/actypes.h:438:0: note: this is the location of the previous
definition
#define TRUE(1 == 1)
^
In file included from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:51:0:
drivers/char/mwave/smapi.h:53:0: warning: "FALSE" redefined
#define FALSE 0
^
In file included from include/acpi/acpi.h:58:0,
from include/linux/acpi.h:33,
from include/linux/mc146818rtc.h:21,
from drivers/char/mwave/smapi.c:50:
include/acpi/actypes.h:433:0: note: this is the location of the previous
definition
#define FALSE (1 == 0)
^
Introduced by commit
fd09cc80165c ("rtc: cmos: move mc146818rtc code out of asm-generic/rtc.h")
Why the hell do we have any definitions of TRUE and FALSE, anyway?
There are a few more (I counted 4 in header files before stopping).
Hmmm, those 2 static inline functions in include/linux/mc146818rtc.h
that reference ACPI stuff are probably to big to be inline and in a header
file anyway, right?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
