linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1073 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h

between commits:

  ded402c7a044 ("drm/i915: move skl_preferred_vco_freq to display substruct")
  8219ab6d6f0d ("drm/i915: move max_dotclk_freq to display substruct")
  9aad73290686 ("drm/i915: move display_irqs_enabled to display substruct")
  f25ae90ff9c6 ("drm/i915: move de_irq_mask to display substruct")
  860cefce5ebe ("drm/i915: move pipestat_irq_mask to display substruct")

from the drm-intel tree and commit:

  070f8fd6c654 ("drm/xe: remove unused struct xe_device members")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (I used the former version) and can carry the fix as
necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider
cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
particularly complex conflicts.



-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1505 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h

between commit:

  c01c6066e6fa ("drm/xe/device: implement transient flush")

from the drm-intel tree and commits:

  fb74b205cdd2 ("drm/xe: Introduce a simple wedged state")
  8ed9aaae39f3 ("drm/xe: Force wedged state and block GT reset upon any GPU hang")
  6b8ef44cc0a9 ("drm/xe: Introduce the wedged_mode debugfs")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
index 7524a71c0d84,82317580f4bf..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
@@@ -167,6 -167,11 +167,13 @@@ void xe_device_snapshot_print(struct xe
  u64 xe_device_canonicalize_addr(struct xe_device *xe, u64 address);
  u64 xe_device_uncanonicalize_addr(struct xe_device *xe, u64 address);
  
 +void xe_device_td_flush(struct xe_device *xe);
 +
+ static inline bool xe_device_wedged(struct xe_device *xe)
+ {
+ 	return atomic_read(&xe->wedged.flag);
+ }
+ 
+ void xe_device_declare_wedged(struct xe_device *xe);
+ 
  #endif

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2514 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c

between commit:

  769b081c18b9 ("drm/i915/opregion: convert to struct intel_display")

from the drm-intel tree and commit:

  1eda95cba9df ("drm/xe: Rename enable_display module param")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
index 0e4adde84cb2,56a940b39412..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
@@@ -127,9 -126,8 +127,9 @@@ int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_de
  static void xe_display_fini_noirq(void *arg)
  {
  	struct xe_device *xe = arg;
 +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
  
- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
  		return;
  
  	intel_display_driver_remove_noirq(xe);
@@@ -138,10 -135,9 +138,10 @@@
  
  int xe_display_init_noirq(struct xe_device *xe)
  {
 +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
  	int err;
  
- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
  		return 0;
  
  	intel_display_driver_early_probe(xe);
@@@ -252,9 -246,7 +252,9 @@@ void xe_display_irq_handler(struct xe_d
  
  void xe_display_irq_enable(struct xe_device *xe, u32 gu_misc_iir)
  {
 +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
 +
- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
  		return;
  
  	if (gu_misc_iir & GU_MISC_GSE)
@@@ -289,9 -296,8 +289,9 @@@ static bool suspend_to_idle(void
  
  void xe_display_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe, bool runtime)
  {
 +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
  	bool s2idle = suspend_to_idle();
- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
  		return;
  
  	/*
@@@ -341,9 -347,7 +341,9 @@@ void xe_display_pm_resume_early(struct 
  
  void xe_display_pm_resume(struct xe_device *xe, bool runtime)
  {
 +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
 +
- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
  		return;
  
  	intel_dmc_resume(xe);

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:37:17AM GMT, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:
>
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>
>between commit:
>
>  769b081c18b9 ("drm/i915/opregion: convert to struct intel_display")
>
>from the drm-intel tree and commit:
>
>  1eda95cba9df ("drm/xe: Rename enable_display module param")
>
>from the drm-xe tree.
>
>I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
>with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>complex conflicts.

this matches our current merge and will be resolved when we backmerge
drm-next, before sending our next pull.

thanks
Lucas De Marchi

>
>-- 
>Cheers,
>Stephen Rothwell
>
>diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>index 0e4adde84cb2,56a940b39412..000000000000
>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>@@@ -127,9 -126,8 +127,9 @@@ int xe_display_init_nommio(struct xe_de
>  static void xe_display_fini_noirq(void *arg)
>  {
>  	struct xe_device *xe = arg;
> +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
>
>- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
>+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
>  		return;
>
>  	intel_display_driver_remove_noirq(xe);
>@@@ -138,10 -135,9 +138,10 @@@
>
>  int xe_display_init_noirq(struct xe_device *xe)
>  {
> +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
>  	int err;
>
>- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
>+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
>  		return 0;
>
>  	intel_display_driver_early_probe(xe);
>@@@ -252,9 -246,7 +252,9 @@@ void xe_display_irq_handler(struct xe_d
>
>  void xe_display_irq_enable(struct xe_device *xe, u32 gu_misc_iir)
>  {
> +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> +
>- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
>+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
>  		return;
>
>  	if (gu_misc_iir & GU_MISC_GSE)
>@@@ -289,9 -296,8 +289,9 @@@ static bool suspend_to_idle(void
>
>  void xe_display_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe, bool runtime)
>  {
> +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
>  	bool s2idle = suspend_to_idle();
>- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
>+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
>  		return;
>
>  	/*
>@@@ -341,9 -347,7 +341,9 @@@ void xe_display_pm_resume_early(struct
>
>  void xe_display_pm_resume(struct xe_device *xe, bool runtime)
>  {
> +	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
> +
>- 	if (!xe->info.enable_display)
>+ 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
>  		return;
>
>  	intel_dmc_resume(xe);

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1270 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c

between commit:

  11d0613af7c5 ("drm/i915/display: include drm/drm_probe_helper.h where needed")

from the drm-intel tree and commit:

  87d8ecf01544 ("drm/xe: replace #include <drm/xe_drm.h> with <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
index 303d00b99a68,75736faf2a80..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
@@@ -10,8 -10,7 +10,8 @@@
  
  #include <drm/drm_drv.h>
  #include <drm/drm_managed.h>
 +#include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
- #include <drm/xe_drm.h>
+ #include <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>
  
  #include "soc/intel_dram.h"
  #include "i915_drv.h"		/* FIXME: HAS_DISPLAY() depends on this */

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 01:15:02PM GMT, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:
>
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>
>between commit:
>
>  11d0613af7c5 ("drm/i915/display: include drm/drm_probe_helper.h where needed")
>
>from the drm-intel tree and commit:
>
>  87d8ecf01544 ("drm/xe: replace #include <drm/xe_drm.h> with <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>")
>
>from the drm-xe tree.
>
>I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This

looks good, thanks

Lucas De Marchi

>is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
>with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>complex conflicts.
>
>-- 
>Cheers,
>Stephen Rothwell
>
>diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>index 303d00b99a68,75736faf2a80..000000000000
>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>@@@ -10,8 -10,7 +10,8 @@@
>
>  #include <drm/drm_drv.h>
>  #include <drm/drm_managed.h>
> +#include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
>- #include <drm/xe_drm.h>
>+ #include <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>
>
>  #include "soc/intel_dram.h"
>  #include "i915_drv.h"		/* FIXME: HAS_DISPLAY() depends on this */

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1530 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 13:15:02 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   11d0613af7c5 ("drm/i915/display: include drm/drm_probe_helper.h where needed")
> 
> from the drm-intel tree and commit:
> 
>   87d8ecf01544 ("drm/xe: replace #include <drm/xe_drm.h> with <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>")
> 
> from the drm-xe tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
> 
> diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> index 303d00b99a68,75736faf2a80..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
> @@@ -10,8 -10,7 +10,8 @@@
>   
>   #include <drm/drm_drv.h>
>   #include <drm/drm_managed.h>
>  +#include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
> - #include <drm/xe_drm.h>
> + #include <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>
>   
>   #include "soc/intel_dram.h"
>   #include "i915_drv.h"		/* FIXME: HAS_DISPLAY() depends on this */

This is now a conflict between the drm-intel and drm trees.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Jani Nikula]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2024, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 13:15:02 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:
>> 
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> 
>> between commit:
>> 
>>   11d0613af7c5 ("drm/i915/display: include drm/drm_probe_helper.h where needed")
>> 
>> from the drm-intel tree and commit:
>> 
>>   87d8ecf01544 ("drm/xe: replace #include <drm/xe_drm.h> with <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>")
>> 
>> from the drm-xe tree.
>> 
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>> complex conflicts.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell
>> 
>> diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> index 303d00b99a68,75736faf2a80..000000000000
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> @@@ -10,8 -10,7 +10,8 @@@
>>   
>>   #include <drm/drm_drv.h>
>>   #include <drm/drm_managed.h>
>>  +#include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
>> - #include <drm/xe_drm.h>
>> + #include <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>
>>   
>>   #include "soc/intel_dram.h"
>>   #include "i915_drv.h"		/* FIXME: HAS_DISPLAY() depends on this */
>
> This is now a conflict between the drm-intel and drm trees.

I backmerged drm-next to drm-intel-next, resolving the conflict.

Thanks,
Jani.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1859 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c

between commit:

  5c30cfa295cc ("drm/i915/dmc: Convert DMC code to intel_display")

from the drm-intel tree and commit:

  a4de6beb83fc ("drm/xe/display: Separate the d3cold and non-d3cold runtime PM handling")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
index 957ae763531d,5c6b74c36b60..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
@@@ -344,7 -340,10 +344,10 @@@ static void __xe_display_pm_suspend(str
  
  	intel_opregion_suspend(display, s2idle ? PCI_D1 : PCI_D3cold);
  
 -	intel_dmc_suspend(xe);
 +	intel_dmc_suspend(display);
+ 
+ 	if (runtime && has_display(xe))
+ 		intel_hpd_poll_enable(xe);
  }
  
  void xe_display_pm_suspend(struct xe_device *xe)
@@@ -453,13 -452,14 +458,15 @@@ static void __xe_display_pm_resume(stru
  		intel_display_driver_resume(xe);
  		drm_kms_helper_poll_enable(&xe->drm);
  		intel_display_driver_enable_user_access(xe);
- 		intel_hpd_poll_disable(xe);
  	}
  
+ 	if (has_display(xe))
+ 		intel_hpd_poll_disable(xe);
+ 
  	intel_opregion_resume(display);
  
 -	intel_fbdev_set_suspend(&xe->drm, FBINFO_STATE_RUNNING, false);
 +	if (!runtime)
 +		intel_fbdev_set_suspend(&xe->drm, FBINFO_STATE_RUNNING, false);
  
  	intel_power_domains_enable(xe);
  }

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1496 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c

between commit:

  1b242ceec536 ("drm/i915/audio: convert to struct intel_display")

from the drm-intel tree and commit:

  8b3f09fb44a3 ("drm/xe: Fix xe_display_fini() calls")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
index 96ba9595bf2a,ac0804726e55..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
@@@ -175,13 -167,12 +167,12 @@@ static void xe_display_fini(void *arg
  	struct xe_device *xe = arg;
  	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
  
- 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
- 		return;
- 
- 	intel_display_driver_remove_nogem(display);
+ 	intel_hpd_poll_fini(xe);
+ 	intel_hdcp_component_fini(display);
 -	intel_audio_deinit(xe);
++	intel_audio_deinit(display);
  }
  
- int xe_display_init_noaccel(struct xe_device *xe)
+ int xe_display_init(struct xe_device *xe)
  {
  	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
  	int err;

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1550 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c

between commit:

  1b242ceec536 ("drm/i915/audio: convert to struct intel_display")

from the drm-intel tree and commit:

  d41d048043c4 ("drm/xe/display: Drop xe_display_driver_remove()")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
index 96ba9595bf2a,279b786d64dc..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
@@@ -175,13 -167,13 +167,13 @@@ static void xe_display_fini(void *arg
  	struct xe_device *xe = arg;
  	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
  
- 	if (!xe->info.probe_display)
- 		return;
- 
- 	intel_display_driver_remove_nogem(display);
+ 	intel_hpd_poll_fini(xe);
+ 	intel_hdcp_component_fini(display);
 -	intel_audio_deinit(xe);
++	intel_audio_deinit(display);
+ 	intel_display_driver_remove(display);
  }
  
- int xe_display_init_noaccel(struct xe_device *xe)
+ int xe_display_init(struct xe_device *xe)
  {
  	struct intel_display *display = &xe->display;
  	int err;

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1262 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c

between commit:

  32620e176443 ("drm/pcids: Split PTL pciids group to make wcl subplatform")

from the drm-intel tree and commit:

  c002b1764e7b ("drm/xe/nvl: Define NVL-S platform")

from the drm-xe tree.

I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
index 89cc6d32f041,c326430e75b5..000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pci.c
@@@ -375,7 -422,7 +422,8 @@@ static const struct pci_device_id pciid
  	INTEL_LNL_IDS(INTEL_VGA_DEVICE, &lnl_desc),
  	INTEL_BMG_IDS(INTEL_VGA_DEVICE, &bmg_desc),
  	INTEL_PTL_IDS(INTEL_VGA_DEVICE, &ptl_desc),
 +	INTEL_WCL_IDS(INTEL_VGA_DEVICE, &ptl_desc),
+ 	INTEL_NVLS_IDS(INTEL_VGA_DEVICE, &nvls_desc),
  	{ }
  };
  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, pciidlist);

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]