[U-Boot] Pull request: u-boot-spi/next

[Jagan Teki]

Fabio,

On 4 November 2015 at 16:38, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jagan,
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Tom,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> NAK.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, this blows up badly for a lot of things when I do:
>>>>> ./tools/buildman/buildman -b master --force-build --step 0 -Cdvel
>>>>> 'blackfin|microblaze|m68k|nds32|x86|aarch64|sandbox|mips|avr32|arm|powerpc|sh4|sparc'
>>>>
>>>> It seems I missed to add bitops for avr32 and mips. Will work on it tomorrow.
>>>
>>> I don't see issues after applying the three attached patches.
>>
>> Ops, I do see a build issue in blackfin that didn't happen in previous
>> versions. Will work on fixing it.
>
> When you reworked my series you missed to updated these functions:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c
> index 31c79c6..d832464 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/sf_ops.c
> @@ -652,7 +652,7 @@ int stm_is_locked(struct spi_flash *flash, u32
> ofs, size_t len)
>   *
>   * Returns negative on errors, 0 on success.
>   */
> -int stm_lock(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 ofs, u32 len)
> +int stm_lock(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 ofs, size_t len)
>  {
>      u8 status_old, status_new;
>      u8 mask = SR_BP2 | SR_BP1 | SR_BP0;
> @@ -703,7 +703,7 @@ int stm_lock(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 ofs, u32 len)
>   *
>   * Returns negative on errors, 0 on success.
>   */
> -int stm_unlock(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 ofs, u32 len)
> +int stm_unlock(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 ofs, size_t len)

Updated u32 to size_t as prototype uses the same. Does this break? it look OK?

thanks!
-- 
Jagan | openedev.