From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from gofer.mess.org (gofer.mess.org [88.97.38.141]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B7DC22324; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 12:58:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=mess.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mess.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mess.org header.i=@mess.org header.b="SZrSYppm" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mess.org; s=2020; t=1704372628; bh=2rIYho0tJC4fQVeP6/cBbLHX5whOI1hHP2hPbbpgze8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=SZrSYppmG8kRGCUnosr7aniaaMeadcFKNVy6SrMe0d79B4F/ByDaAeDIGTX/P8e7I PJgo+r+eT2+uz3IsN65cwhk75HOmuguHYscVpN9fsAwoxjxS+WSto/KiQsIcRQHAfZ 6lX1MZG2Z5lNSpxrW28GC3VClCxPkEVO9z9FDqO/5StIj7zdcUjTMxAsvfQBJKq81q ufyR0eMIKfjOXLtEWz6cLRQ8xdU2Zk+R7Ebg1Okla5Iy/gDbSxmYEQQlHb2k+MH6bp xhOV1HF11uummEJ1SAyhW1W5aDsEK84tKOqMwC7Pg2qw+Dmi5g4BfvF4eP2a7lryxg G5v0Fqb9AInFg== Received: by gofer.mess.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1760F1000FC; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 12:50:28 +0000 (GMT) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 12:50:28 +0000 From: Sean Young To: Bagas Sanjaya Cc: Thierry Reding , Lee Jones , Jingoo Han , Linus Torvalds , Stephen Rothwell , Flavio Suligoi , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux DRI Development Subject: Re: (subset) linux-next: build failure after merge of the pwm tree Message-ID: References: <20231221165805.0c4771c1@canb.auug.org.au> <170316329164.542553.8341559295114557258.b4-ty@kernel.org> <20231221125801.GG10102@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 05:02:41PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > [also add Jingoo (additional backlight maintainer) and Linus] > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 07:34:57PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 12:58:01PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Dec 2023, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 16:58:05 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > After merging the backlight tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > > > > > allmodconfig) failed like this: > > > > > > > > > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c: In function 'mp3309c_bl_update_status': > > > > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c:134:23: error: implicit declaration of function 'pwm_apply_state'; did you mean 'pwm_apply_args'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > > 134 | ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate); > > > > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > | pwm_apply_args > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > Applied, thanks! > > > > > > > > [1/1] linux-next: build failure after merge of the pwm tree > > > > commit: f7baa9ccef93ba1c36a8ecf58c2f4e86fb3181b9 > > > > > > Actually it's: > > > > > > f7baa9ccef93b ("backlight: mp3309c: Rename pwm_apply_state() to pwm_apply_might_sleep()") > > > > > > But don't bank on the commit ID staying the same. > > > > This is likely going to break the build on your branch because > > pwm_apply_might_sleep() is only available in the PWM tree right now. In > > any case, I've now pushed a commit that adds pwm_apply_state() back as a > > compatibility stub, so it should be okay for you to drop this if you > > run into problems. It's always possible that somebody else wants to add > > a new caller of pwm_apply_state() and in retrospect we should've > > probably done this from the start, at least as a transitional measure > > for one or two cycles. > > > > Hi Lee and Thierry, > > I know that we're still on New Year vibes, so some things are not up to full > steam for now; but since we're close to v6.7 release and v6.8 merge window, > hence allow me to ask: > > Stephen Rothwell is still complaining about backlight tree build failure > due to f7baa9ccef93b, yet it has not been fixed so far. Has the culprit > been dropped/reverted as he requested? The worst case is the culprit slips > through and become part of backlight PR and Linus will likely not happy > with the build regression (maybe he had to fix by himself). This should be fixed by 9a216587a03df, and on current linux-next I can't reproduce the problem any more (x86_64 allmodconfig). Thanks, Sean