* [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
@ 2019-06-27 9:19 Jani Nikula
2019-06-27 10:13 ` Chris Wilson
2019-06-27 15:16 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jani Nikula @ 2019-06-27 9:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx; +Cc: jani.nikula
The static keyword was apparently accidentally removed in commit
08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs"), leading to
sparse warning:
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c:3382:6: warning: symbol
'i945gm_vblank_work_func' was not declared. Should it be static?
Make the function static again.
Fixes: 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs")
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
index 1b83d6e2ae69..73f0338faf9f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
@@ -3379,7 +3379,7 @@ void bdw_disable_vblank(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->irq_lock, irqflags);
}
-void i945gm_vblank_work_func(struct work_struct *work)
+static void i945gm_vblank_work_func(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv =
container_of(work, struct drm_i915_private, i945gm_vblank.work);
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
2019-06-27 9:19 [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again Jani Nikula
@ 2019-06-27 10:13 ` Chris Wilson
2019-06-27 10:26 ` Jani Nikula
2019-06-27 15:16 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2019-06-27 10:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx; +Cc: jani.nikula
Quoting Jani Nikula (2019-06-27 10:19:14)
> The static keyword was apparently accidentally removed in commit
> 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs"), leading to
> sparse warning:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c:3382:6: warning: symbol
> 'i945gm_vblank_work_func' was not declared. Should it be static?
>
> Make the function static again.
>
> Fixes: 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs")
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
3 people (well 2 and a robot) send patches for the same compiler
warning! That means something, right?
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
2019-06-27 10:13 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2019-06-27 10:26 ` Jani Nikula
2019-06-27 10:28 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jani Nikula @ 2019-06-27 10:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, intel-gfx
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> Quoting Jani Nikula (2019-06-27 10:19:14)
>> The static keyword was apparently accidentally removed in commit
>> 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs"), leading to
>> sparse warning:
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c:3382:6: warning: symbol
>> 'i945gm_vblank_work_func' was not declared. Should it be static?
>>
>> Make the function static again.
>>
>> Fixes: 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs")
>> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>
> 3 people (well 2 and a robot) send patches for the same compiler
> warning! That means something, right?
That writing patches is more rewarding than reading patches written by
others...? ;)
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Thanks, likewise, let's see whose patch passes CI first. Looks like your
patch regresses module reload. :D
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
2019-06-27 10:26 ` Jani Nikula
@ 2019-06-27 10:28 ` Chris Wilson
2019-06-27 13:12 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2019-06-27 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jani Nikula, intel-gfx
Quoting Jani Nikula (2019-06-27 11:26:16)
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> > Quoting Jani Nikula (2019-06-27 10:19:14)
> >> The static keyword was apparently accidentally removed in commit
> >> 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs"), leading to
> >> sparse warning:
> >>
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c:3382:6: warning: symbol
> >> 'i945gm_vblank_work_func' was not declared. Should it be static?
> >>
> >> Make the function static again.
> >>
> >> Fixes: 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs")
> >> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> >
> > 3 people (well 2 and a robot) send patches for the same compiler
> > warning! That means something, right?
>
> That writing patches is more rewarding than reading patches written by
> others...? ;)
>
> > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Thanks, likewise, let's see whose patch passes CI first. Looks like your
> patch regresses module reload. :D
Now known to cibuglog, you cheat!
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
2019-06-27 10:28 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2019-06-27 13:12 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2019-06-27 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jani Nikula, intel-gfx
Quoting Chris Wilson (2019-06-27 11:28:37)
> Quoting Jani Nikula (2019-06-27 11:26:16)
> > On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Quoting Jani Nikula (2019-06-27 10:19:14)
> > >> The static keyword was apparently accidentally removed in commit
> > >> 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs"), leading to
> > >> sparse warning:
> > >>
> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c:3382:6: warning: symbol
> > >> 'i945gm_vblank_work_func' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > >>
> > >> Make the function static again.
> > >>
> > >> Fixes: 08fa8fd0faa5 ("drm/i915: Switch to per-crtc vblank vfuncs")
> > >> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> > >
> > > 3 people (well 2 and a robot) send patches for the same compiler
> > > warning! That means something, right?
> >
> > That writing patches is more rewarding than reading patches written by
> > others...? ;)
> >
> > > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >
> > Thanks, likewise, let's see whose patch passes CI first. Looks like your
> > patch regresses module reload. :D
>
> Now known to cibuglog, you cheat!
I called it a draw and pushed both merged into one :)
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
2019-06-27 9:19 [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again Jani Nikula
2019-06-27 10:13 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2019-06-27 15:16 ` Patchwork
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2019-06-27 15:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jani Nikula; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/62841/
State : failure
== Summary ==
Applying: drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
No changes -- Patch already applied.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-06-27 15:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-06-27 9:19 [PATCH] drm/i915/irq: make i945gm_vblank_work_func() static again Jani Nikula
2019-06-27 10:13 ` Chris Wilson
2019-06-27 10:26 ` Jani Nikula
2019-06-27 10:28 ` Chris Wilson
2019-06-27 13:12 ` Chris Wilson
2019-06-27 15:16 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox