Re: [PATCH 0/4] drivers/bus: Freescale Management Complex bus driver patch series

From: German Rivera
Date: Wed Sep 17 2014 - 20:20:51 EST

On 09/15/2014 06:44 PM, Kim Phillips wrote:
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:34:20 -0500
"J. German Rivera" <German.Rivera@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

This patch series introduces Linux support for the Freescale
Management Complex (fsl-mc) hardware.

here are the results of using some tools to check this patchseries:

make C=1 CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__":

drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_sys.c:235:9: warning: context imbalance in 'mc_send_command' - different lock contexts for basic block
drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_dprc.c: In function 'dprc_add_new_devices':
drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_dprc.c:173:6: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'uint32_t' [-Wformat=]

I'll fix this in v2 respin.

When built as a module (CONFIG_FSL_MC_BUS=m):

ERROR: ".dprc_get_obj" [drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_dprc.ko] undefined!
ERROR: ".dprc_get_obj_count" [drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_dprc.ko] undefined!
ERROR: ".dprc_close" [drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_dprc.ko] undefined!
ERROR: ".dprc_open" [drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_dprc.ko] undefined!
ERROR: ".dprc_get_obj_region" [drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_dprc.ko] undefined!
make[1]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
make: *** [modules] Error 2

I'll fix this in v2 respin.


WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?

WARNING: DT compatible string "fsl,qoriq-mc" appears un-documented -- check ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/
#690: FILE: drivers/bus/fsl-mc/fsl_mc_bus.c:528:
+ {.compatible = "fsl,qoriq-mc",},

For the former warning, I'd suggest moving patch 4/4's contents up
in the series.

I tried moving 4/4 to be 1/4 but still get the the same warning from checkpatch. So, this suggestion does not work. Besides, I took a look
at other commits that update the MAINTAINERS such as
563da3a90364fc29cd09bed034162592e591747a, and that commit comes after the commits that added the new files.

For the latter warning, googling for the property shows an upstream
effort, so it might be ok, but it'd be nice to provide a
cross-reference to the status of the latest post, to make it easier
for reviewer consumption.

Also, I think you'd get more recipient coverage by using



To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at