On Thursday 17 December 2015 13:01:57 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:27:22PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 14 December 2015 14:52:06 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > > > What about not ifdeffing the inline function and keep the build error
> > > > > whenever someone uses it
> > My conclusion for now is:
> >
> > There needs something to be done surely, but currently I don't have the
> > bandwidth to do it or even play around with it. I am not fully happy
> > with your patches as well because __maybe_unused has some kind of "last
> > resort" feeling to me.
>
> I
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:27:22PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 14 December 2015 14:52:06 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > > What about not ifdeffing the inline function and keep the build error
> > > > whenever someone uses it without I2C_SLAVE being selected?
> > >
> > > The inline function
On Thursday 17 December 2015 20:40:17 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > My conclusion for now is:
> > >
> > > There needs something to be done surely, but currently I don't have the
> > > bandwidth to do it or even play around with it. I am not fully happy
> > > with your patches as well because
On Sunday 13 December 2015 10:09:59 Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
> What about not ifdeffing the inline function and keep the build error
> whenever someone uses it without I2C_SLAVE being selected?
The inline function is only added there for the case that I2C_SLAVE is
disabled, so that would be
On Monday 14 December 2015 14:52:06 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > What about not ifdeffing the inline function and keep the build error
> > > whenever someone uses it without I2C_SLAVE being selected?
> >
> > The inline function is only added there for the case that I2C_SLAVE is
> > disabled, so that
On Saturday 12 December 2015 17:20:57 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> thanks for looking into this, but I don't get your point yet.
>
> > The slave_cb callback function is supposed to set the 'value'
> > here,
>
> Only if a master wants to READ from us.
Right, and can this never fail?
> >
On Thursday 10 December 2015 14:34:46 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 02:14:49PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > The emev2 driver stopped compiling in today's linux-next kernel:
> >
> > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c: In function 'em_i2c_slave_irq':
> >
The emev2 driver stopped compiling in today's linux-next kernel:
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c: In function 'em_i2c_slave_irq':
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c:233:23: error: storage size of 'event' isn't
known
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c:250:3: error: implicit declaration of function
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 02:14:49PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The emev2 driver stopped compiling in today's linux-next kernel:
>
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c: In function 'em_i2c_slave_irq':
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-emev2.c:233:23: error: storage size of 'event' isn't
> known
>
Hi Arnd,
[auto build test WARNING on wsa/i2c/for-next]
[also build test WARNING on next-20151210]
[cannot apply to v4.4-rc4]
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Arnd-Bergmann/i2c-allow-building-emev2-without-slave-mode-again/20151210-211642
base:
On Thursday 10 December 2015 22:54:25 kbuild test robot wrote:
>
>In file included from arch/x86/include/asm/realmode.h:5:0,
> from arch/x86/include/asm/acpi.h:33,
> from arch/x86/include/asm/fixmap.h:19,
> from
12 matches
Mail list logo
