1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. View series

[PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in pci1xxxx's gpio driver

Kumaravel Thiagarajan posted 1 patch 3 years, 6 months ago
There is a newer version of this series
drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
[PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in pci1xxxx's gpio driver
Posted by Kumaravel Thiagarajan 3 years, 6 months ago 
build errors listed below and reported for the builds of
riscv, s390, csky, alpha and loongarch allmodconfig are fixed in
this patch.

drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:311:12: error: 'pci1xxxx_gpio_resume' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
  311 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_resume(struct device *dev)
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:295:12: error: 'pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
  295 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend(struct device *dev)
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fixes: 4ec7ac90ff39 ("misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: Add power management functions - suspend & resume handlers.")
Reported-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kumaravel Thiagarajan <kumaravel.thiagarajan@microchip.com>
---
 drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c b/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c
index 9cc771c604ed..4cd541166b0c 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c
@@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ static int pci1xxxx_gpio_probe(struct auxiliary_device *aux_dev,
 	return devm_gpiochip_add_data(&aux_dev->dev, &priv->gpio, priv);
 }
 
-static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(pci1xxxx_gpio_pm_ops, pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend, pci1xxxx_gpio_resume);
+static DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(pci1xxxx_gpio_pm_ops, pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend, pci1xxxx_gpio_resume);
 
 static const struct auxiliary_device_id pci1xxxx_gpio_auxiliary_id_table[] = {
 	{.name = "mchp_pci1xxxx_gp.gp_gpio"},
-- 
2.25.1
Re: [PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in pci1xxxx's gpio driver
Posted by Bagas Sanjaya 3 years, 6 months ago 
On 9/12/22 18:36, Kumaravel Thiagarajan wrote:
> build errors listed below and reported for the builds of
> riscv, s390, csky, alpha and loongarch allmodconfig are fixed in
> this patch.
> 
> drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:311:12: error: 'pci1xxxx_gpio_resume' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
>   311 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_resume(struct device *dev)
>       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:295:12: error: 'pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
>   295 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend(struct device *dev)
>       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 

What about this description?:

"Sudip reported unused function errors on riscv, s390, cksy, alpha,
and loongarch (allmodconfig):
<pci1xxxx_gpio_* errors>...

Fix these errors by using DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS."

> Fixes: 4ec7ac90ff39 ("misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: Add power management functions - suspend & resume handlers.")
> Reported-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kumaravel Thiagarajan <kumaravel.thiagarajan@microchip.com>
> ---
>  drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c b/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c
> index 9cc771c604ed..4cd541166b0c 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c
> @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ static int pci1xxxx_gpio_probe(struct auxiliary_device *aux_dev,
>  	return devm_gpiochip_add_data(&aux_dev->dev, &priv->gpio, priv);
>  }
>  
> -static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(pci1xxxx_gpio_pm_ops, pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend, pci1xxxx_gpio_resume);
> +static DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(pci1xxxx_gpio_pm_ops, pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend, pci1xxxx_gpio_resume);
>  
>  static const struct auxiliary_device_id pci1xxxx_gpio_auxiliary_id_table[] = {
>  	{.name = "mchp_pci1xxxx_gp.gp_gpio"},


-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
RE: [PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in pci1xxxx's gpio driver
Posted by Kumaravel.Thiagarajan@microchip.com 3 years, 6 months ago 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 7:15 PM
> To: Kumaravel Thiagarajan - I21417
> <Kumaravel.Thiagarajan@microchip.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com; arnd@arndb.de; linux-
> gpio@vger.kernel.org; linux-next@vger.kernel.org;
> gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use
> DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in
> pci1xxxx's gpio driver
> 
> On 9/12/22 18:36, Kumaravel Thiagarajan wrote:
> > build errors listed below and reported for the builds of riscv, s390,
> > csky, alpha and loongarch allmodconfig are fixed in this patch.
> >
> > drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:311:12: error:
> 'pci1xxxx_gpio_resume' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> >   311 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_resume(struct device *dev)
> >       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:295:12: error:
> 'pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> >   295 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend(struct device *dev)
> >       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> 
> What about this description?:
> 
> "Sudip reported unused function errors on riscv, s390, cksy, alpha, and
> loongarch (allmodconfig):
> <pci1xxxx_gpio_* errors>...
> 
> Fix these errors by using DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS."
It looks good even though it does not include all the details.
But is not how much of detail good enough subjective?
I thought some might be looking for more information and chose this way.
Do you think I need to change this? Please let me know.
> 
> > Fixes: 4ec7ac90ff39 ("misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: Add power management
> > functions - suspend & resume handlers.")
> > Reported-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kumaravel Thiagarajan
> > <kumaravel.thiagarajan@microchip.com>
> > ---
.
.

Thank You.

Regards,
Kumaravel
Re: [PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in pci1xxxx's gpio driver
Posted by Bagas Sanjaya 3 years, 6 months ago 
On 9/14/22 01:27, Kumaravel.Thiagarajan@microchip.com wrote:
>> On 9/12/22 18:36, Kumaravel Thiagarajan wrote:
>>> build errors listed below and reported for the builds of riscv, s390,
>>> csky, alpha and loongarch allmodconfig are fixed in this patch.
>>>
>>> drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:311:12: error:
>> 'pci1xxxx_gpio_resume' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
>>>   311 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_resume(struct device *dev)
>>>       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:295:12: error:
>> 'pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
>>>   295 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>>       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>
>> What about this description?:
>>
>> "Sudip reported unused function errors on riscv, s390, cksy, alpha, and
>> loongarch (allmodconfig):
>> <pci1xxxx_gpio_* errors>...
>>
>> Fix these errors by using DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS."
> It looks good even though it does not include all the details.
> But is not how much of detail good enough subjective?
> I thought some might be looking for more information and chose this way.
> Do you think I need to change this? Please let me know.

Yes, with full error text as Sudip had reported.

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
RE: [PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in pci1xxxx's gpio driver
Posted by Kumaravel.Thiagarajan@microchip.com 3 years, 6 months ago 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2022 7:30 AM
> To: Kumaravel Thiagarajan - I21417
> <Kumaravel.Thiagarajan@microchip.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com; arnd@arndb.de; linux-
> gpio@vger.kernel.org; linux-next@vger.kernel.org;
> gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH char-misc-next] misc: microchip: pci1xxxx: use
> DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in place of the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() in
> pci1xxxx's gpio driver
>  
> On 9/14/22 01:27, Kumaravel.Thiagarajan@microchip.com wrote:
> >> On 9/12/22 18:36, Kumaravel Thiagarajan wrote:
> >>> build errors listed below and reported for the builds of riscv,
> >>> s390, csky, alpha and loongarch allmodconfig are fixed in this patch.
> >>>
> >>> drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:311:12: error:
> >> 'pci1xxxx_gpio_resume' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> >>>   311 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_resume(struct device *dev)
> >>>       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>> drivers/misc/mchp_pci1xxxx/mchp_pci1xxxx_gpio.c:295:12: error:
> >> 'pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend' defined but not used
> >> [-Werror=unused-function]
> >>>   295 | static int pci1xxxx_gpio_suspend(struct device *dev)
> >>>       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>
> >>
> >> What about this description?:
> >>
> >> "Sudip reported unused function errors on riscv, s390, cksy, alpha,
> >> and loongarch (allmodconfig):
> >> <pci1xxxx_gpio_* errors>...
> >>
> >> Fix these errors by using DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS."
> > It looks good even though it does not include all the details.
> > But is not how much of detail good enough subjective?
> > I thought some might be looking for more information and chose this way.
> > Do you think I need to change this? Please let me know.
> 
> Yes, with full error text as Sudip had reported.
Yes. I had included his name only in the Reported-by: tag and missed it in the commit
description. I have fixed it in v2.

Thank You.

Regards,
Kumaravel

Patchew 2.1-devel-ea86937

© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.