lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/8] soc: tegra: fuse: Change to the correct __dma_request_channel() prototype
From
Date
07.05.2019 9:09, Baolin Wang пишет:
> Since we've introduced one device node parameter for __dma_request_channel(),
> thus change to the correct function prototype.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c b/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c
> index 49ff017..e2571b6 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/tegra/fuse/fuse-tegra20.c
> @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ static int tegra20_fuse_probe(struct tegra_fuse *fuse)
> dma_cap_zero(mask);
> dma_cap_set(DMA_SLAVE, mask);
>
> - fuse->apbdma.chan = __dma_request_channel(&mask, dma_filter, NULL);
> + fuse->apbdma.chan = __dma_request_channel(&mask, dma_filter, NULL, NULL);
> if (!fuse->apbdma.chan)
> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>
>

1) Kernel should be kept bisect'able by not having intermediate patches
that break compilation. Hence you should squash the changes into a
single patch.

2) Better to replace __dma_request_channel() with dma_request_channel()
since they are equal.

--
Dmitry

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-08 17:15    [W:0.079 / U:8.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site