[PATCH] [RFC] USB: fsl_udc_core: fix build-failure for ARM

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:54:46AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:39:54AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Hello Greg,
> > 
> > On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 11:00:05AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > Commit
> > > 
> > > 	09ba0de (USB: fsl_udc_core: prepare for SoCs with BE registers and descriptors)
> > > 
> > > introduced two function pointers _fsl_readl and _fsl_writel in an #ifdef
> > > CONFIG_PPC32 block and used then unconditionally in fsl_udc_probe.
> > > To make the driver compile again this use has to be protected by
> > > an #ifdef, too. Moreover ARM doesn't have flush_dcache_range so this
> > > is #ifdefed out, too.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de>
> > > ---
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > I'm unsure about getting rid of the flush_dcache_range. If powerpc needs
> > > a flush ARM probably does, too, no?
> > > If so, what it the right thing to do? Implement flush_dcache_range for
> > > ARM (just wrapping flush_dcache_page?)?
> > As Russell seem to be OK with the #ifdef, can you please take this
> > patch?
> 
> Ick, no.

I never said I was OK with the #ifdef...

> Come on, we don't have ifdefs in .c files for a reason, surely there is
> a better fix for this some other way?

I suggested ways to fix it, which apparantly got ignored.  To repeat myself,
what I said was:

"Well, the folk introducing it should have added it to cachetlb.txt so
that other folk know what the intentions of it are.  At the moment it
seems to be an unofficial extension with unknown semantics.  Maybe the
PPC folk can clear it up and fix other arches if they wish to make it
an official arch cachetlb extension."