Re: [PATCH] m68k: tweak coldfire/device.c for COMPILE_TEST

[Greg Ungerer]

On 5/3/22 02:20, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 3/4/22 06:45, Greg Ungerer wrote:
> > Hi Randy,
> >
> > On 4/3/22 13:35, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > When CONFIG_MCF_EDMA is set (due to COMPILE_TEST, not due to
> > > CONFIG_M5441x), coldfire/device.c has compile errors due to
> > > missing MCFEDMA_* symbols. In the .config file that was provided,
> > > CONFIG_M5206=y, not CONFIG_M5441x, so <asm/m5441xsim.h> is not
> > > included in coldfire/device.c.
> > >
> > > Only build the MCF_EDMA code in coldfire/device.c if both MCF_EDMA
> > > and M5441x are enabled.
> > >
> > > Fixes these build errors:
> > >
> > > ../arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c:512:35: error: 'MCFEDMA_BASE' undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean 'MCFDMA_BASE1'?
> > >     512 |                 .start          = MCFEDMA_BASE,
> > > ../arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c:513:50: error: 'MCFEDMA_SIZE' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > >     513 |                 .end            = MCFEDMA_BASE + MCFEDMA_SIZE - 1,
> > > ../arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c:517:35: error: 'MCFEDMA_IRQ_INTR0' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > >     517 |                 .start          = MCFEDMA_IRQ_INTR0,
> > > ../arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c:523:35: error: 'MCFEDMA_IRQ_INTR16' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > >     523 |                 .start          = MCFEDMA_IRQ_INTR16,
> > > ../arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c:529:35: error: 'MCFEDMA_IRQ_INTR56' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > >     529 |                 .start          = MCFEDMA_IRQ_INTR56,
> > > ../arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c:535:35: error: 'MCFEDMA_IRQ_ERR' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > >     535 |                 .start          = MCFEDMA_IRQ_ERR,
> > >
> > > Fixes: d7e9d01ac292 ("m68k: add ColdFire mcf5441x eDMA platform support")
> > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Link: lore.kernel.org/r/202203030252.P752DK46-lkp@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: Angelo Dureghello <angelo@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Greg Ungerer <gerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: linux-m68k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: uclinux-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > ---
> > >    arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c |    6 +++---
> > >    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > --- linux-next-20220303.orig/arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c
> > > +++ linux-next-20220303/arch/m68k/coldfire/device.c
> > > @@ -480,7 +480,7 @@ static struct platform_device mcf_i2c5 =
> > >    #endif /* MCFI2C_BASE5 */
> > >    #endif /* IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_IMX) */
> > >    -#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MCF_EDMA)
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MCF_EDMA) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_M5441x)
> >
> > I really try to avoid making these ColdFire SoC specific. Freescale has
> > a habit of using the same hardware blocks across a number of parts.
> > The model so far has been to let the Kconfig select these out as required
> > (and so not having to conditionally duplicate that here).
> >
> > I would prefer it to be conditional on !COMPILE_TEST if that is what
> > is ultimately causing the problem.
>
> What is ultimately causing the problem is drivers/dma/Kconfig:
>
> config MCF_EDMA
> 	tristate "Freescale eDMA engine support, ColdFire mcf5441x SoCs"
> 	depends on M5441x || COMPILE_TEST
>
>
> Would you prefer to just remove that COMPILE_TEST?
>
> Or do like Geert suggested -- see your previous patch:
> commit 322c512f476f07e9 ("m68knommu: include SDHC support only when hardware has it")

No need to remove COMPILE_TEST, so lets leave that in place.

I should have thought about what I had done here in the past before I replied :-)
As Geert pointed out the strategy we used before is to just make it conditional
on the address definitions. So lets do that. The presence of an address definition
is the real indicator that we have this hardware block.

Regards
Greg