lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: linux-next: build failure after merge of the pwm tree
    On Thu, 21 Dec 2023, Thierry Reding wrote:

    > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 04:58:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > 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
    > >
    > > Caused by commit
    > >
    > > c748a6d77c06 ("pwm: Rename pwm_apply_state() to pwm_apply_might_sleep()")
    > >
    > > interacting with commit
    > >
    > > 2e914516a58c ("backlight: mp3309c: Add support for MPS MP3309C")
    > >
    > > from the backlight tree.
    > >
    > > I have appplied the following merge fix patch.
    > >
    > > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
    > > Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 16:13:37 +1100
    > > Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "backlight: mp3309c: Add support for MPS MP3309C"
    > >
    > > from the backlight tree interacting with commit
    > >
    > > c748a6d77c06 ("pwm: Rename pwm_apply_state() to pwm_apply_might_sleep()")
    > >
    > > from the pwm tree.
    > >
    > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
    > > ---
    > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c | 4 ++--
    > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
    > >
    > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c b/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c
    > > index 34d71259fac1..b0d9aef6942b 100644
    > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c
    > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c
    > > @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static int mp3309c_bl_update_status(struct backlight_device *bl)
    > > chip->pdata->levels[brightness],
    > > chip->pdata->levels[chip->pdata->max_brightness]);
    > > pwmstate.enabled = true;
    > > - ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
    > > + ret = pwm_apply_might_sleep(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
    > > if (ret)
    > > return ret;
    > >
    > > @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ static int mp3309c_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
    > > chip->pdata->default_brightness,
    > > chip->pdata->max_brightness);
    > > pwmstate.enabled = true;
    > > - ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
    > > + ret = pwm_apply_might_sleep(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
    > > if (ret)
    > > return dev_err_probe(chip->dev, ret,
    > > "error setting pwm device\n");
    >
    > Hi Lee,
    >
    > We could exchange stable tags to make this work, but given that people
    > (myself included) are getting into holiday mode I'm inclined to just add
    > a pwm_apply_state() compatibility inline for now and then we can address
    > this in the new year or for the next cycle. What do you think?

    Sorry, why is this happening?

    I still see support for pwm_apply_state() in -next.

    --
    Lee Jones [李琼斯]

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2023-12-21 11:10    [W:3.286 / U:0.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site