ARM: PXA: Fix build error for PXA93x

[PATCH] ARM: PXA: Fix build error for PXA93x

Posted by Ulf Hansson 1 month, 3 weeks ago

From: Ulf Hansson <ulfh@kernel.org>

Add a missing semicolon to fix the build error for PXA93x.

Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202607301822.cl0lEkQt-lkp@intel.com/
Fixes: ab9c44bbf6d7 ("ARM: PXA: remove remnants of PXA93x support")
Cc: Ethan Nelson-Moore <enelsonmoore@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulfh@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h b/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h
index 38bacdae684f..c5b275a80854 100644
--- a/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h
+++ b/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@
 	({						\
 		__cpu_is_pxa300(id)			\
 			|| __cpu_is_pxa310(id)		\
-			|| __cpu_is_pxa320(id)		\
+			|| __cpu_is_pxa320(id);		\
 	 })
 #else
 #define __cpu_is_pxa3xx(id)	(0)
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH] ARM: PXA: Fix build error for PXA93x

Posted by Ethan Nelson-Moore 1 month, 2 weeks ago

On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 4:51 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@oss.qualcomm.com> wrote:
>
> From: Ulf Hansson <ulfh@kernel.org>
>
> Add a missing semicolon to fix the build error for PXA93x.
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202607301822.cl0lEkQt-lkp@intel.com/
> Fixes: ab9c44bbf6d7 ("ARM: PXA: remove remnants of PXA93x support")
> Cc: Ethan Nelson-Moore <enelsonmoore@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulfh@kernel.org>
> ---
>  include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h b/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h
> index 38bacdae684f..c5b275a80854 100644
> --- a/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/soc/pxa/cpu.h
> @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@
>         ({                                              \
>                 __cpu_is_pxa300(id)                     \
>                         || __cpu_is_pxa310(id)          \
> -                       || __cpu_is_pxa320(id)          \
> +                       || __cpu_is_pxa320(id);         \
>          })
>  #else
>  #define __cpu_is_pxa3xx(id)    (0)
> --
> 2.43.0
>

Hi, Ulf,

That's embarrassing. Thanks for catching it.

Ethan