dmaengine: edma: Rename set_bits and remove unused clear_bits helper

Commit Message

Peter Ujfalusi Sept. 22, 2016, 6:31 a.m. UTC

The clear_bits() helper is not used by the driver so it can be removed.

powerpc architecture defines the set_bits() in
arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h which results failed compile testing on
powerpc architecture:


>> drivers/dma/edma.c:415:20: error: conflicting types for 'set_bits'
    static inline void set_bits(int offset, int len, unsigned long *p)
                       ^~~~~~~~
   In file included from include/linux/bitops.h:36:0,
                    from include/linux/kernel.h:10,
                    from include/linux/list.h:8,
                    from include/linux/kobject.h:20,
                    from include/linux/device.h:17,
                    from include/linux/dmaengine.h:20,
                    from drivers/dma/edma.c:16:
   arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h:75:14: note: previous definition of 'set_bits' was here
    DEFINE_BITOP(set_bits, or, "")
                 ^
   arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h:58:24: note: in definition of macro 'DEFINE_BITOP'
    static __inline__ void fn(unsigned long mask, \
                           ^~


>> drivers/dma/edma.c:421:20: error: conflicting types for 'clear_bits'
    static inline void clear_bits(int offset, int len, unsigned long *p)
                       ^~~~~~~~~~
   In file included from include/linux/bitops.h:36:0,
                    from include/linux/kernel.h:10,
                    from include/linux/list.h:8,
                    from include/linux/kobject.h:20,
                    from include/linux/device.h:17,
                    from include/linux/dmaengine.h:20,
                    from drivers/dma/edma.c:16:
   arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h:76:14: note: previous definition of 'clear_bits' was here
    DEFINE_BITOP(clear_bits, andc, "")
                 ^
   arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h:58:24: note: in definition of macro 'DEFINE_BITOP'
    static __inline__ void fn(unsigned long mask, \
                           ^~

Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <[e-mail]>
---
Hi,

the eDMA/sDMA/ti-crossbar COMPILE_TEST series brought up this issue reported by
Intel kbuild test robot.

Vinod: Should I send a v4 of the COMPILE_TEST series, or is it OK if this patch
goes separately? The compile test failure should not break bisect for PPC...

Regards,
Peter

 drivers/dma/edma.c | 10 ++--------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

--
2.10.0

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
the body of a message to [e-mail]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/dma/edma.c b/drivers/dma/edma.c
index 0241f39ba64c..1f967545fb33 100644
--- a/drivers/dma/edma.c
+++ b/drivers/dma/edma.c
@@ -412,18 +412,12 @@  static inline void edma_param_or(struct edma_cc *ecc, int offset, int param_no,
 	edma_or(ecc, EDMA_PARM + offset + (param_no << 5), or);
 }

-static inline void set_bits(int offset, int len, unsigned long *p)
+static inline void edma_set_bits(int offset, int len, unsigned long *p)
 {
 	for (; len > 0; len--)
 		set_bit(offset + (len - 1), p);
 }

-static inline void clear_bits(int offset, int len, unsigned long *p)
-{
-	for (; len > 0; len--)
-		clear_bit(offset + (len - 1), p);
-}
-
 static void edma_assign_priority_to_queue(struct edma_cc *ecc, int queue_no,
 					  int priority)
 {
@@ -2266,7 +2260,7 @@  static int edma_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 			for (i = 0; rsv_slots[i][0] != -1; i++) {
 				off = rsv_slots[i][0];
 				ln = rsv_slots[i][1];
-				set_bits(off, ln, ecc->slot_inuse);
+				edma_set_bits(off, ln, ecc->slot_inuse);
 			}
 		}
 	}