Re: [PATCH 5/5] ASoC: cs35l56: Add KUnit testing of cs35l56_set_fw_suffix()

[Philip Li <philip.li@intel.com>]

On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 02:56:01PM +0000, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> On 22/01/2026 10:25 am, kernel test robot wrote:
> > Hi Richard,
> > 
> > kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
> > 
> > [auto build test WARNING on broonie-sound/for-next]
> > [also build test WARNING on linus/master v6.19-rc6 next-20260121]
> > [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> > And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> > https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
> > 
> > url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Richard-Fitzgerald/ASoC-cs-amp-lib-Support-Dell-SSIDExV2-UEFI-variable/20260121-220028
> > base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next
> > patch link:    https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260121132243.1256019-6-rf%40opensource.cirrus.com
> > patch subject: [PATCH 5/5] ASoC: cs35l56: Add KUnit testing of cs35l56_set_fw_suffix()
> > config: arm64-randconfig-003-20260122 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260122/202601221843.kS9IMZ0E-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > compiler: clang version 22.0.0git (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 9b8addffa70cee5b2acc5454712d9cf78ce45710)
> > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260122/202601221843.kS9IMZ0E-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
> > 
> > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> > the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601221843.kS9IMZ0E-lkp@intel.com/
> > 
> > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
> > 
> > > > WARNING: modpost: module snd-soc-cs35l56-test uses symbol cs35l56_set_fw_suffix from namespace EXPORTED_FOR_KUNIT_TESTING, but does not import it.
> > 
> Please reply to all people on a thread. And as a minimum include people
> who were To: on the original patch email. Otherwise people who matter
> won't see this report.

Sorry about this, it's an issue in the bot that it has a logic to try to
reduce the report number to public for same issue, but the detection is
not reliable. We will disable the logic to let all reports behaves the same
to send to related persons.

>