Re: [PATCH 03/15] dmr/msm: cleanup: drm_modeset_lock_all_ctx() --> DRM_MODESET_LOCK_ALL_BEGIN()

Fernando Ramos
2021-09-20T21:27:34Z

On 21/09/20 09:54AM, kernel test robot wrote:
>
> [auto build test ERROR on drm-exynos/exynos-drm-next]
> [also build test ERROR on tegra-drm/drm/tegra/for-next linus/master v5.15-rc2 next-20210917]

I forgot to #include <drm/drm_drv.h> for those platforms and didn't notice
because I only tried to build for X86. I'll fix it.

> [cannot apply to drm-intel/for-linux-next tegra/for-next drm-tip/drm-tip airlied/drm-next]
> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base'.

I built this patch against drm-next, which currently points to v5.15-rc1.

Should I be targeting a different branch? In any case, as suggested, I'll
remember to use "--base" in the future to make it easier to apply. Thanks for
the hint.

> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> In file included from include/drm/drm_crtc.h:36,
> from include/drm/drm_atomic_helper.h:31,
> from drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/msm_disp_snapshot.h:9,
> from drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/msm_disp_snapshot_util.c:8:
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/msm_disp_snapshot_util.c: In function 'msm_disp_capture_atomic_state':
> >> include/drm/drm_modeset_lock.h:167:14: error: implicit declaration of function 'drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 167 | if (!drm_drv_uses_atomic_modeset(dev)) \
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/msm_disp_snapshot_util.c:108:9: note: in expansion of macro 'DRM_MODESET_LOCK_ALL_BEGIN'
> 108 | DRM_MODESET_LOCK_ALL_BEGIN(ddev, ctx, 0, ret);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors

Out of curiosity: The top comment says there were two build errors (one on
exynos and another one on tegra), but there is only one reported bug (on msm).

Is this because the bot only reports the first error found? Is there a link to
a report with each of the build errors on each of the platforms?

Thanks.