Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Randy Dunlap]

On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> 
> Changes since 20140618:
> 

on i386:

CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.

  CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
  CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1



-- 
~Randy

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Jani Nikula]

On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
>> 
>> Changes since 20140618:
>> 
>
> on i386:
>
> CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
>
>   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1

Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.

Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.

So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
trouble of adding?

BR,
Jani.


-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 02:43:02 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> >> 
> >> Changes since 20140618:
> >> 
> >
> > on i386:
> >
> > CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
> >
> >   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> >   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1
> 
> Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.
> 
> Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
> CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
> acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
> CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
> CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.

These two things look like bugs to me.  Most likely not tested thoruoughly
enough.

> So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
> neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
> trouble of adding?

No, we don't have to.

Rafael

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Daniel Vetter]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:01:36AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 02:43:02 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >> Hi all,
> > >> 
> > >> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> > >> 
> > >> Changes since 20140618:
> > >> 
> > >
> > > on i386:
> > >
> > > CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
> > >
> > >   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > >   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1
> > 
> > Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.
> > 
> > Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
> > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
> > acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
> > CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
> > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.
> 
> These two things look like bugs to me.  Most likely not tested thoruoughly
> enough.
> 
> > So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
> > neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
> > trouble of adding?
> 
> No, we don't have to.

Back from my vacation and I didn't see a conclusion to this issue here.
Rafael, have you fixed this in your acpi tree or do I need to do something
in drm-intel?
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, July 07, 2014 04:54:23 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:01:36AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 02:43:02 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > > On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > >> Hi all,
> > > >> 
> > > >> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> > > >> 
> > > >> Changes since 20140618:
> > > >> 
> > > >
> > > > on i386:
> > > >
> > > > CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
> > > >
> > > >   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > > >   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > > make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.
> > > 
> > > Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
> > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
> > > acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
> > > CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
> > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.
> > 
> > These two things look like bugs to me.  Most likely not tested thoruoughly
> > enough.
> > 
> > > So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
> > > neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
> > > trouble of adding?
> > 
> > No, we don't have to.
> 
> Back from my vacation and I didn't see a conclusion to this issue here.
> Rafael, have you fixed this in your acpi tree or do I need to do something
> in drm-intel?

I was on vacation too. :-)

Please have a look if i915 includes acpi/acpi_bus.h directly anywhere.  If so,
it should include linux/acpi.h instead.  I'll fix up the rest in the ACPI tree.

Rafael

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 10:01:27PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, July 07, 2014 04:54:23 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:01:36AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 02:43:02 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > > > On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Changes since 20140618:
> > > > >> 
> > > > >
> > > > > on i386:
> > > > >
> > > > > CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
> > > > >
> > > > >   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > > > >   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > > > make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.
> > > > 
> > > > Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
> > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
> > > > acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
> > > > CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
> > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.
> > > 
> > > These two things look like bugs to me.  Most likely not tested thoruoughly
> > > enough.
> > > 
> > > > So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
> > > > neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
> > > > trouble of adding?
> > > 
> > > No, we don't have to.
> > 
> > Back from my vacation and I didn't see a conclusion to this issue here.
> > Rafael, have you fixed this in your acpi tree or do I need to do something
> > in drm-intel?
> 
> I was on vacation too. :-)
> 
> Please have a look if i915 includes acpi/acpi_bus.h directly anywhere.  If so,
> it should include linux/acpi.h instead.  I'll fix up the rest in the ACPI tree.

We seem to only use linux/acpi.h and acpi/(video|button).h, at least
according to a grep include.*acpi. So I think we're good in i915 land.
Thanks for taking care of this.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, July 07, 2014 10:06:59 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 10:01:27PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, July 07, 2014 04:54:23 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:01:36AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 02:43:02 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > > > > On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> Changes since 20140618:
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >
> > > > > > on i386:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > > > > >   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> > > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > > > > make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
> > > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
> > > > > acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
> > > > > CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
> > > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.
> > > > 
> > > > These two things look like bugs to me.  Most likely not tested thoruoughly
> > > > enough.
> > > > 
> > > > > So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
> > > > > neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
> > > > > trouble of adding?
> > > > 
> > > > No, we don't have to.
> > > 
> > > Back from my vacation and I didn't see a conclusion to this issue here.
> > > Rafael, have you fixed this in your acpi tree or do I need to do something
> > > in drm-intel?
> > 
> > I was on vacation too. :-)
> > 
> > Please have a look if i915 includes acpi/acpi_bus.h directly anywhere.  If so,
> > it should include linux/acpi.h instead.  I'll fix up the rest in the ACPI tree.
> 
> We seem to only use linux/acpi.h and acpi/(video|button).h, at least
> according to a grep include.*acpi. So I think we're good in i915 land.
> Thanks for taking care of this.

The patch below should fix this if I'm not mistaken.

Rafael

---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Subject: ACPI / sleep: Fix up acpi_target_system_state() stub definition

The static inline stub for acpi_target_system_state() is defined in
include/acpi/acpi_bus.h, but that file is only included if CONFIG_ACPI
is set, so drivers that use acpi_target_system_state() will fail to
build for CONFIG_ACPI unset.

To prevent that from happening move the definition of the static
inline stub for acpi_target_system_state() to include/linux/acpi.h.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
 include/acpi/acpi_bus.h |    6 ------
 include/linux/acpi.h    |    6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Index: linux-pm/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
+++ linux-pm/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
@@ -566,12 +566,6 @@ static inline int acpi_pm_device_sleep_w
 }
 #endif
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
-u32 acpi_target_system_state(void);
-#else
-static inline u32 acpi_target_system_state(void) { return ACPI_STATE_S0; }
-#endif
-
 static inline bool acpi_device_power_manageable(struct acpi_device *adev)
 {
 	return adev->flags.power_manageable;
Index: linux-pm/include/linux/acpi.h
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/acpi.h
+++ linux-pm/include/linux/acpi.h
@@ -541,6 +541,12 @@ static inline void arch_reserve_mem_area
 #define acpi_os_set_prepare_sleep(func, pm1a_ctrl, pm1b_ctrl) do { } while (0)
 #endif
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
+u32 acpi_target_system_state(void);
+#else
+static inline u32 acpi_target_system_state(void) { return ACPI_STATE_S0; }
+#endif
+
 #if defined(CONFIG_ACPI) && defined(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME)
 int acpi_dev_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev);
 int acpi_dev_runtime_resume(struct device *dev);

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, July 07, 2014 11:49:22 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, July 07, 2014 10:06:59 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 10:01:27PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 07, 2014 04:54:23 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:01:36AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 02:43:02 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >> Changes since 20140618:
> > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > on i386:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> > > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> > > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > > > > > >   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> > > > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > > > > > make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
> > > > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
> > > > > > acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
> > > > > > CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
> > > > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.
> > > > > 
> > > > > These two things look like bugs to me.  Most likely not tested thoruoughly
> > > > > enough.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
> > > > > > neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
> > > > > > trouble of adding?
> > > > > 
> > > > > No, we don't have to.
> > > > 
> > > > Back from my vacation and I didn't see a conclusion to this issue here.
> > > > Rafael, have you fixed this in your acpi tree or do I need to do something
> > > > in drm-intel?
> > > 
> > > I was on vacation too. :-)
> > > 
> > > Please have a look if i915 includes acpi/acpi_bus.h directly anywhere.  If so,
> > > it should include linux/acpi.h instead.  I'll fix up the rest in the ACPI tree.
> > 
> > We seem to only use linux/acpi.h and acpi/(video|button).h, at least
> > according to a grep include.*acpi. So I think we're good in i915 land.
> > Thanks for taking care of this.
> 
> The patch below should fix this if I'm not mistaken.

So I was mistaken, as it turns out.

The problem is that ACPI sleep states are not defined for CONFIG_ACPI
unset, quite obviously, so using acpi_target_system_state() in that
case doesn't make sense at all.

Rafael