Re: [PATCH] clk: export __clk_get_hw for re-use in others
From: SeongJae Park
Date: Mon Jan 20 2014 - 03:07:52 EST
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Mike Turquette <mturquette@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 02:55:07PM +0900, SeongJae Park wrote:
>>> Following build comes while modprobe process:
>>> > ERROR: "__clk_get_hw" [drivers/clk/clk-max77686.ko] undefined!
>>> > make: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>> > make: *** [modules] Error 2
>>> Export the symbol to fix it and for other part's usecase.
>>> Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> drivers/clk/clk.c | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
>>> index 2b38dc9..3883fba 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
>>> @@ -575,6 +575,7 @@ struct clk_hw *__clk_get_hw(struct clk *clk)
>>> return !clk ? NULL : clk->hw;
>> __ functions should usually only be for "internal" use, why does this
>> get exported to modules? Why not just put it in a .h file?
> It was originally used only within the clock core but it is sensible
> for hardware-specific clock drivers to use this as well. I plan to
> audit all of the double-underscore functions in
> include/linux/clk-provider.h for 3.15.
Thank you very much for answering about it, Mike.
I agree Greg's indication and think Mike's explanation is reasonable.
So, I think it would be better to just export the symbol now
because it would be easier for future functions renaming and
similar issues were solved in this way in past:
Or, maybe I can change the client code of __clk_get_hw to not use the function.
What do you think would be better to fix this build error? Or, do you
have better idea?
I will respect your opinion.
Thanks and Regards.
>> greg k-h
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/