Re: [PATCH v6] staging: fbtft: Use fbdev logging helpers when FB_DEVICE is disabled

[Chintan Patel <chintanlike@gmail.com>]

On 1/12/26 22:16, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 08:59:09PM -0800, Chintan Patel wrote:
>> Replace direct accesses to info->dev with fb_dbg() and fb_info()
>> helpers to avoid build failures when CONFIG_FB_DEVICE=n.
> 
> Why is there a fb_* specific logging helper?  dev_info() and dev_dbg()
> should be used instead.


You’re correct that dev_dbg()/dev_info() are the standard logging APIs.

The reason I switched to fb_dbg()/fb_info() is not stylistic: direct
dereferences of info->dev / fb_info->dev are invalid when
CONFIG_FB_DEVICE=n, which causes compile-time errors.

fb_dbg() and fb_info() are framebuffer-specific helpers that handle
this case correctly, allowing logging without touching info->dev.

> 
>> Fixes: a06d03f9f238 ("staging: fbtft: Make FB_DEVICE dependency optional")
> 
> Is this really a bug?

The build failure occurs when CONFIG_FB_DEVICE=n, where direct
dereferences of info->dev / fb_info->dev are not valid. This was 
reported by the kernel test robot.

That said, I’m fine dropping the Fixes tag if you don’t consider this a
regression.

>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601110740.Y9XK5HtN-lkp@intel.com
>> Signed-off-by: Chintan Patel <chintanlike@gmail.com>
>>
>> Changes in v6:
>> - Switch debug/info logging to fb_dbg() and fb_info()(suggested by Thomas Zimmermann)
>> - Drop dev_of_fbinfo() usage in favor of framebuffer helpers that implicitly
>>    handle the debug/info context.
>> - Drop __func__ usage per review feedback(suggested by greg k-h)
>> - Add Fixes tag for a06d03f9f238 ("staging: fbtft: Make FB_DEVICE dependency optional")
>>    (suggested by Andy Shevchenko)
>>
>> Changes in v5:
>> - Initial attempt to replace info->dev accesses using
>>    dev_of_fbinfo() helper
>> ---
> 
> The changelog stuff goes below the --- line.

Ack.

> 
>>   drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c | 19 +++++++++----------
>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
>> index 8a5ccc8ae0a1..1b3b62950205 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
>> @@ -365,9 +365,9 @@ static int fbtft_fb_setcolreg(unsigned int regno, unsigned int red,
>>   	unsigned int val;
>>   	int ret = 1;
>>   
>> -	dev_dbg(info->dev,
>> -		"%s(regno=%u, red=0x%X, green=0x%X, blue=0x%X, trans=0x%X)\n",
>> -		__func__, regno, red, green, blue, transp);
>> +	fb_dbg(info,
>> +	       "regno=%u, red=0x%X, green=0x%X, blue=0x%X, trans=0x%X\n",
>> +	       regno, red, green, blue, transp);
> 
> I dont understand what is wrong with the existing dev_dbg() line (with
> the exception that __func__ should not be in it.
> 
>>   
>>   	switch (info->fix.visual) {
>>   	case FB_VISUAL_TRUECOLOR:
>> @@ -391,8 +391,7 @@ static int fbtft_fb_blank(int blank, struct fb_info *info)
>>   	struct fbtft_par *par = info->par;
>>   	int ret = -EINVAL;
>>   
>> -	dev_dbg(info->dev, "%s(blank=%d)\n",
>> -		__func__, blank);
>> +	fb_dbg(info, "blank=%d\n", blank);
> 
> Same here, what's wrong with dev_dbg()?
> 

Same reason: dereferencing info->dev is invalid when CONFIG_FB_DEVICE=n. 
fb_dbg() handles this correctly without needing info->dev.

>>   
>>   	if (!par->fbtftops.blank)
>>   		return ret;
>> @@ -793,11 +792,11 @@ int fbtft_register_framebuffer(struct fb_info *fb_info)
>>   	if (spi)
>>   		sprintf(text2, ", spi%d.%d at %d MHz", spi->controller->bus_num,
>>   			spi_get_chipselect(spi, 0), spi->max_speed_hz / 1000000);
>> -	dev_info(fb_info->dev,
>> -		 "%s frame buffer, %dx%d, %d KiB video memory%s, fps=%lu%s\n",
>> -		 fb_info->fix.id, fb_info->var.xres, fb_info->var.yres,
>> -		 fb_info->fix.smem_len >> 10, text1,
>> -		 HZ / fb_info->fbdefio->delay, text2);
>> +	fb_info(fb_info,
>> +		"%s frame buffer, %dx%d, %d KiB video memory%s, fps=%lu%s\n",
>> +		fb_info->fix.id, fb_info->var.xres, fb_info->var.yres,
>> +		fb_info->fix.smem_len >> 10, text1,
>> +		HZ / fb_info->fbdefio->delay, text2);
> 
> When drivers work properly, they are quiet.  Why is this needed at all
> except as a debug message?

Agreed. The informational message during framebuffer registration is not
necessary. I will either remove it entirely or convert it to a 
debug-only message.

I’ll rework the patch accordingly and resend.

Thanks again for the guidance.