From: lkp@intel.com (kbuild test robot)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/3] PM / OPP: Expose _of_get_opp_desc_node as dev_pm_opp API
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 07:34:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201610280714.775pYCIq%fengguang.wu@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161027214131.1725-2-d-gerlach@ti.com>
Hi Dave,
[auto build test ERROR on robh/for-next]
[also build test ERROR on v4.9-rc2]
[cannot apply to pm/linux-next next-20161027]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system]
[Suggest to use git(>=2.9.0) format-patch --base=<commit> (or --base=auto for convenience) to record what (public, well-known) commit your patch series was built on]
[Check https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch for more information]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Dave-Gerlach/cpufreq-Introduce-TI-CPUFreq-OPP-Driver/20161028-054633
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/robh/linux.git for-next
config: xtensa-allmodconfig (attached as .config)
compiler: xtensa-linux-gcc (GCC) 4.9.0
reproduce:
wget https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git/plain/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
make.cross ARCH=xtensa
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:184:6: error: redefinition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table'
void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device *dev)
^
In file included from drivers/base/power/opp/opp.h:21:0,
from drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:22:
include/linux/pm_opp.h:218:20: note: previous definition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table' was here
static inline void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device *dev)
^
>> drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:191:21: error: redefinition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_get_opp_desc_node'
struct device_node *dev_pm_opp_of_get_opp_desc_node(struct device *dev)
^
In file included from drivers/base/power/opp/opp.h:21:0,
from drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:22:
include/linux/pm_opp.h:236:35: note: previous definition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_get_opp_desc_node' was here
static inline struct device_node *dev_pm_opp_of_get_opp_desc_node(struct device *dev)
^
drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:434:5: error: redefinition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_add_table'
int dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(struct device *dev)
^
In file included from drivers/base/power/opp/opp.h:21:0,
from drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:22:
include/linux/pm_opp.h:213:19: note: previous definition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_add_table' was here
static inline int dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(struct device *dev)
^
drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:474:6: error: redefinition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table'
void dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table(const struct cpumask *cpumask)
^
In file included from drivers/base/power/opp/opp.h:21:0,
from drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:22:
include/linux/pm_opp.h:227:20: note: previous definition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table' was here
static inline void dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_remove_table(const struct cpumask *cpumask)
^
drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:492:5: error: redefinition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_add_table'
int dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_add_table(const struct cpumask *cpumask)
^
In file included from drivers/base/power/opp/opp.h:21:0,
from drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:22:
include/linux/pm_opp.h:222:19: note: previous definition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_add_table' was here
static inline int dev_pm_opp_of_cpumask_add_table(const struct cpumask *cpumask)
^
drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:545:5: error: redefinition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_get_sharing_cpus'
int dev_pm_opp_of_get_sharing_cpus(struct device *cpu_dev,
^
In file included from drivers/base/power/opp/opp.h:21:0,
from drivers/base/power/opp/of.c:22:
include/linux/pm_opp.h:231:19: note: previous definition of 'dev_pm_opp_of_get_sharing_cpus' was here
static inline int dev_pm_opp_of_get_sharing_cpus(struct device *cpu_dev, struct cpumask *cpumask)
^
vim +/dev_pm_opp_of_get_opp_desc_node +191 drivers/base/power/opp/of.c
178 * Locking: The internal opp_table and opp structures are RCU protected.
179 * Hence this function indirectly uses RCU updater strategy with mutex locks
180 * to keep the integrity of the internal data structures. Callers should ensure
181 * that this function is *NOT* called under RCU protection or in contexts where
182 * mutex cannot be locked.
183 */
> 184 void dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(struct device *dev)
185 {
186 _dev_pm_opp_remove_table(dev, false);
187 }
188 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table);
189
190 /* Returns opp descriptor node for a device, caller must do of_node_put() */
> 191 struct device_node *dev_pm_opp_of_get_opp_desc_node(struct device *dev)
192 {
193 /*
194 * TODO: Support for multiple OPP tables.
---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: .config.gz
Type: application/gzip
Size: 46043 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20161028/0c934d6a/attachment-0001.gz>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-27 23:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-27 21:41 [PATCH v3 0/3] cpufreq: Introduce TI CPUFreq/OPP Driver Dave Gerlach
2016-10-27 21:41 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] PM / OPP: Expose _of_get_opp_desc_node as dev_pm_opp API Dave Gerlach
2016-10-27 23:34 ` kbuild test robot [this message]
2016-10-28 4:05 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-10-31 21:03 ` Dave Gerlach
2016-10-27 21:41 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] Documentation: dt: add bindings for ti-cpufreq Dave Gerlach
2016-11-02 3:59 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-11-02 16:03 ` Dave Gerlach
2016-11-03 2:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2016-10-27 21:41 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] cpufreq: ti: Add cpufreq driver to determine available OPPs at runtime Dave Gerlach
2016-11-02 4:03 ` Viresh Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201610280714.775pYCIq%fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--to=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox