Re:linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

Re:linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Ashish Jangam]

> Hi Anton,
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_bat_read_volt':
> drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:293:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'da9052_adc_manual_read' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_bat_check_presence':
> drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:306:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'da9052_adc_read_temp' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_determine_vc_tbl_index':
> drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:348:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> 
> Caused by commit ded7fc7b0550 ("power_supply: Add DA9052 battery driver").
> 
> The commit message says "This driver depends on DA9052 MFD core dirver for definitions and methods".  That core is presumably still pending inclusion.
> 
> I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
This patch depends upon Da9052/53 MFD core and also on one of its incremental patch for ADC that got these functions definitions. Below is that patch.
We had already posted this patch.

Signed-off-by: David Dajun Chen <dchen@diasemi.com>
Signed-off-by: Ashish Jangam <ashish.jangam@kpitcummins.com>
---
 drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c         |  188 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/mfd/da9052/da9052.h |   22 +++++
 2 files changed, 210 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c b/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c
index 5ddde2a..c21ce78 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/da9052-core.c
@@ -319,6 +319,162 @@ static bool da9052_reg_volatile(struct device *dev, unsigned int reg)
 	}
 }
 
+/*
+ * TBAT look-up table is computed from the R90 reg (8 bit register)
+ * reading as below. The battery temperature is in milliCentigrade
+ * TBAT = (1/(t1+1/298) - 273) * 1000 mC
+ * where t1 = (1/B)* ln(( ADCval * 2.5)/(R25*ITBAT*255))
+ * Default values are R25 = 10e3, B = 3380, ITBAT = 50e-6
+ * Example:
+ * R25=10E3, B=3380, ITBAT=50e-6, ADCVAL=62d calculates
+ * TBAT = 20015 mili degrees Centrigrade
+ *
+*/
+static const int32_t tbat_lookup[255] = {
+	183258, 144221, 124334, 111336, 101826, 94397, 88343, 83257,
+	78889, 75071, 71688, 68656, 65914, 63414, 61120, 59001,
+	570366, 55204, 53490, 51881, 50364, 48931, 47574, 46285,
+	45059, 43889, 42772, 41703, 40678, 39694, 38748, 37838,
+	36961, 36115, 35297, 34507, 33743, 33002, 32284, 31588,
+	30911, 30254, 29615, 28994, 28389, 27799, 27225, 26664,
+	26117, 25584, 25062, 24553, 24054, 23567, 23091, 22624,
+	22167, 21719, 21281, 20851, 20429, 20015, 19610, 19211,
+	18820, 18436, 18058, 17688, 17323, 16965, 16612, 16266,
+	15925, 15589, 15259, 14933, 14613, 14298, 13987, 13681,
+	13379, 13082, 12788, 12499, 12214, 11933, 11655, 11382,
+	11112, 10845, 10582, 10322, 10066, 9812, 9562, 9315,
+	9071, 8830, 8591, 8356, 8123, 7893, 7665, 7440,
+	7218, 6998, 6780, 6565, 6352, 6141, 5933, 5726,
+	5522, 5320, 5120, 4922, 4726, 4532, 4340, 4149,
+	3961, 3774, 3589, 3406, 3225, 3045, 2867, 2690,
+	2516, 2342, 2170, 2000, 1831, 1664, 1498, 1334,
+	1171, 1009, 849, 690, 532, 376, 221, 67,
+	-84, -236, -386, -535, -683, -830, -975, -1119,
+	-1263, -1405, -1546, -1686, -1825, -1964, -2101, -2237,
+	-2372, -2506, -2639, -2771, -2902, -3033, -3162, -3291,
+	-3418, -3545, -3671, -3796, -3920, -4044, -4166, -4288,
+	-4409, -4529, -4649, -4767, -4885, -5002, -5119, -5235,
+	-5349, -5464, -5577, -5690, -5802, -5913, -6024, -6134,
+	-6244, -6352, -6461, -6568, -6675, -6781, -6887, -6992,
+	-7096, -7200, -7303, -7406, -7508, -7609, -7710, -7810,
+	-7910, -8009, -8108, -8206, -8304, -8401, -8497, -8593,
+	-8689, -8784, -8878, -8972, -9066, -9159, -9251, -9343,
+	-9435, -9526, -9617, -9707, -9796, -9886, -9975, -10063,
+	-10151, -10238, -10325, -10412, -10839, -10923, -11007, -11090,
+	-11173, -11256, -11338, -11420, -11501, -11583, -11663, -11744,
+	-11823, -11903, -11982
+};
+
+static const u8 chan_mux[DA9052_ADC_VBBAT + 1] = {
+	[DA9052_ADC_VDDOUT]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_VDDOUT,
+	[DA9052_ADC_ICH]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_ICH,
+	[DA9052_ADC_TBAT]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_TBAT,
+	[DA9052_ADC_VBAT]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_VBAT,
+	[DA9052_ADC_IN4]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_AD4,
+	[DA9052_ADC_IN5]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_AD5,
+	[DA9052_ADC_IN6]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_AD6,
+	[DA9052_ADC_VBBAT]	= DA9052_ADC_MAN_MUXSEL_VBBAT
+};
+
+enum da9052_auxadc {
+	VDDOUT = DA9052_ADC_VDDOUT,
+	ICH = DA9052_ADC_ICH,
+	TBAT = DA9052_ADC_TBAT,
+	VBAT = DA9052_ADC_VBAT,
+	IN4 = DA9052_ADC_IN4,
+	IN5 = DA9052_ADC_IN5,
+	IN6 = DA9052_ADC_IN6,
+	VBBAT = DA9052_ADC_VBBAT,
+};
+
+struct da9052_auxadc_req {
+	struct list_head list;
+	enum da9052_auxadc input;
+	struct completion done;
+};
+
+int da9052_adc_manual_read(struct da9052 *da9052, unsigned char channel)
+{
+	struct da9052_auxadc_req *req;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned short calc_data;
+	unsigned short data;
+	unsigned char mux_sel;
+
+	if (channel > DA9052_ADC_VBBAT)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	req = kzalloc(sizeof(*req), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!req)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	init_completion(&req->done);
+	req->input = channel;
+
+	mutex_lock(&da9052->auxadc_lock);
+
+	/* Channel gets activated on enabling the Conversion bit */
+	mux_sel = chan_mux[channel] | DA9052_ADC_MAN_MAN_CONV;
+
+	if (da9052->auxadc_active) {
+		ret = -EBUSY;
+		goto err;
+	}
+
+	/* Enqueue the request */
+	list_add(&req->list, &da9052->auxadc_pending);
+
+	ret = da9052_reg_write(da9052, DA9052_ADC_MAN_REG, mux_sel);
+	if (ret < 0)
+		goto err;
+
+	da9052->auxadc_active = channel;
+
+	mutex_unlock(&da9052->auxadc_lock);
+
+	/* Wait for an interrupt */
+	wait_for_completion_timeout(&req->done, msecs_to_jiffies(500));
+
+	mutex_lock(&da9052->auxadc_lock);
+
+	ret = da9052_reg_read(da9052, DA9052_ADC_RES_H_REG);
+	if (ret < 0)
+		goto err;
+
+	calc_data = (unsigned short)ret;
+	data = calc_data << 2;
+
+	ret = da9052_reg_read(da9052, DA9052_ADC_RES_L_REG);
+	if (ret < 0)
+		goto err;
+
+	calc_data = (unsigned short)(ret & DA9052_ADC_RES_LSB);
+	data |= calc_data;
+
+	ret = data;
+
+	list_del(&req->list);
+err:
+	mutex_unlock(&da9052->auxadc_lock);
+	kfree(req);
+	return ret;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(da9052_adc_manual_read);
+
+int da9052_adc_read_temp(struct da9052 *da9052)
+{
+	int tbat;
+
+	tbat = da9052_reg_read(da9052, DA9052_TBAT_RES_REG);
+
+	if (tbat < 0)
+		return tbat;
+
+	/* ARRAY_SIZE check is not needed since TBAT is a 8-bit register */
+	return tbat_lookup[tbat - 1];
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(da9052_adc_read_temp);
+
 static struct resource da9052_rtc_resource = {
 	.name = "ALM",
 	.start = DA9052_IRQ_ALARM,
@@ -641,6 +797,25 @@ struct regmap_config da9052_regmap_config = {
 };
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(da9052_regmap_config);
 
+static irqreturn_t da9052_auxadc_irq(int irq, void *irq_data)
+{
+	struct da9052 *da9052 = irq_data;
+	struct da9052_auxadc_req *req;
+
+	mutex_lock(&da9052->auxadc_lock);
+
+	/* Wake up any threads waiting for this request */
+	list_for_each_entry(req, &da9052->auxadc_pending, list) {
+		if (req->input == da9052->auxadc_active)
+			complete(&req->done);
+	}
+	da9052->auxadc_active = 0;
+
+	mutex_unlock(&da9052->auxadc_lock);
+
+	return IRQ_HANDLED;
+}
+
 int __devinit da9052_device_init(struct da9052 *da9052, u8 chip_id)
 {
 	struct da9052_pdata *pdata = da9052->dev->platform_data;
@@ -648,11 +823,15 @@ int __devinit da9052_device_init(struct da9052 *da9052, u8 chip_id)
 	int ret;
 
 	mutex_init(&da9052->io_lock);
+	mutex_init(&da9052->auxadc_lock);
+
+	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&da9052->auxadc_pending);
 
 	if (pdata && pdata->init != NULL)
 		pdata->init(da9052);
 
 	da9052->chip_id = chip_id;
+	da9052->auxadc_active = 0;
 
 	if (!pdata || !pdata->irq_base)
 		da9052->irq_base = -1;
@@ -669,6 +848,15 @@ int __devinit da9052_device_init(struct da9052 *da9052, u8 chip_id)
 	desc = irq_to_desc(da9052->chip_irq);
 	da9052->irq_base = regmap_irq_chip_get_base(desc->action->dev_id);
 
+	ret = request_threaded_irq(da9052->irq_base + DA9052_IRQ_ADC_EOM,
+				   NULL, da9052_auxadc_irq,
+				   IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW | IRQF_ONESHOT,
+				   "adc irq", da9052);
+	if (ret != 0) {
+		dev_err(da9052->dev, "DA9052 ADC IRQ failed ret=%d\n", ret);
+		da9052->auxadc_active = -1;
+	}
+
 	ret = mfd_add_devices(da9052->dev, -1, da9052_subdev_info,
 			      ARRAY_SIZE(da9052_subdev_info), NULL, 0);
 	if (ret)
diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/da9052/da9052.h b/include/linux/mfd/da9052/da9052.h
index 5702d1b..6069c26 100644
--- a/include/linux/mfd/da9052/da9052.h
+++ b/include/linux/mfd/da9052/da9052.h
@@ -33,6 +33,20 @@
 
 #include <linux/mfd/da9052/reg.h>
 
+/* HWMON Channel Definations */
+#define DA9052_ADC_VDDOUT	0
+#define DA9052_ADC_ICH		1
+#define DA9052_ADC_TBAT	2
+#define DA9052_ADC_VBAT	3
+#define DA9052_ADC_IN4		4
+#define DA9052_ADC_IN5		5
+#define DA9052_ADC_IN6		6
+#define DA9052_ADC_TSI		7
+#define DA9052_ADC_TJUNC	8
+#define DA9052_ADC_VBBAT	9
+
+#define DA9052_MASK_ADC_EOM	0x2000
+
 #define DA9052_IRQ_DCIN	0
 #define DA9052_IRQ_VBUS	1
 #define DA9052_IRQ_DCINREM	2
@@ -77,16 +91,24 @@ struct da9052_pdata;
 
 struct da9052 {
 	struct mutex io_lock;
+	struct mutex auxadc_lock;
 
 	struct device *dev;
 	struct regmap *regmap;
 
+	struct list_head auxadc_pending;
+	u8 auxadc_active;
+
 	int irq_base;
 	u8 chip_id;
 
 	int chip_irq;
 };
 
+/* ADC API */
+int da9052_adc_manual_read(struct da9052 *da9052, unsigned char channel);
+int da9052_adc_read_temp(struct da9052 *da9052);
+
 /* Device I/O API */
 static inline int da9052_reg_read(struct da9052 *da9052, unsigned char reg)
 {
---
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
> http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Anton Vorontsov]

On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:59:29PM +0530, Ashish Jangam wrote:
> > Hi Anton,
> > 
> > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_bat_read_volt':
> > drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:293:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'da9052_adc_manual_read' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_bat_check_presence':
> > drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:306:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'da9052_adc_read_temp' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_determine_vc_tbl_index':
> > drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:348:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
> > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > 
> > Caused by commit ded7fc7b0550 ("power_supply: Add DA9052 battery driver").
> > 
> > The commit message says "This driver depends on DA9052 MFD core dirver for definitions and methods".  That core is presumably still pending inclusion.

Well, it is in the MFD tree already, otherwise allmodconfig would not
be able to select this driver.

> > I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
> This patch depends upon Da9052/53 MFD core and also on one of its incremental patch for ADC that got these functions definitions. Below is that patch.
> We had already posted this patch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Dajun Chen <dchen@diasemi.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ashish Jangam <ashish.jangam@kpitcummins.com>
> ---

So, this patch should go via MFD tree asap. Otherwise, I'll have to
disable this driver by making it depend on 'broken' in Kconfig.

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 05:10:37PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:59:29PM +0530, Ashish Jangam wrote:

> > > Caused by commit ded7fc7b0550 ("power_supply: Add DA9052 battery driver").

> > > The commit message says "This driver depends on DA9052 MFD core dirver for definitions and methods".  That core is presumably still pending inclusion.

> Well, it is in the MFD tree already, otherwise allmodconfig would not
> be able to select this driver.

It didn't actually go in via the MFD tree, it went in via regmap, but
same difference.

> > > I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
> > This patch depends upon Da9052/53 MFD core and also on one of its incremental patch for ADC that got these functions definitions. Below is that patch.
> > We had already posted this patch.

> So, this patch should go via MFD tree asap. Otherwise, I'll have to
> disable this driver by making it depend on 'broken' in Kconfig.

The regmap tree has already been merged by Linus which makes things a
bit tricky, it'd probably need to wait for -rc1 for Samuel to send it
givne that Linus was saying he really wanted everything to have been in
-next before the merge window.

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Anton Vorontsov]

On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 11:53:18PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 05:10:37PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:59:29PM +0530, Ashish Jangam wrote:
> 
> > > > Caused by commit ded7fc7b0550 ("power_supply: Add DA9052 battery driver").
> 
> > > > The commit message says "This driver depends on DA9052 MFD core dirver for definitions and methods".  That core is presumably still pending inclusion.
> 
> > Well, it is in the MFD tree already, otherwise allmodconfig would not
> > be able to select this driver.
> 
> It didn't actually go in via the MFD tree, it went in via regmap, but
> same difference.
> 
> > > > I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
> > > This patch depends upon Da9052/53 MFD core and also on one of its incremental patch for ADC that got these functions definitions. Below is that patch.
> > > We had already posted this patch.
> 
> > So, this patch should go via MFD tree asap. Otherwise, I'll have to
> > disable this driver by making it depend on 'broken' in Kconfig.
> 
> The regmap tree has already been merged by Linus which makes things a
> bit tricky, it'd probably need to wait for -rc1 for Samuel to send it
> givne that Linus was saying he really wanted everything to have been in
> -next before the merge window.

OK. So, I'm marking it as broken...

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2520 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c: In function 'rt5033_charger_probe':
drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_parse_phandle' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  694 |         np_conn = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node, "richtek,usb-connector", 0);
      |                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:17: error: assignment to 'struct device_node *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
  694 |         np_conn = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node, "richtek,usb-connector", 0);
      |                 ^
drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:695:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_get_parent'; did you mean 'kernfs_get_parent'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  695 |         np_edev = of_get_parent(np_conn);
      |                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                   kernfs_get_parent
drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:695:17: error: assignment to 'struct device_node *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
  695 |         np_edev = of_get_parent(np_conn);
      |                 ^

Caused by commit

  2ce8284c3115 ("power: Explicitly include correct DT includes")

interacting with commit

  12cc585f36b8 ("power: supply: rt5033_charger: Add cable detection and USB OTG supply")

from the mfd tree.

I have applied the following merge fix patch.

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:50:12 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "power: Explicitly include correct DT includes"

interacting with commit

  12cc585f36b8 ("power: supply: rt5033_charger: Add cable detection and USB OTG supply")

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
---
 drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c b/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
index 4d1198d752b7..4ea769775fa5 100644
--- a/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
+++ b/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
 #include <linux/extcon.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
 #include <linux/platform_device.h>
 #include <linux/power_supply.h>
 #include <linux/regmap.h>
-- 
2.40.1

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Lee Jones]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c: In function 'rt5033_charger_probe':
> drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_parse_phandle' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

Is this because your merge-conflict patch:

  linux-next: manual merge of the battery tree with the mfd tree

... removed of_device.h?

>   694 |         np_conn = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node, "richtek,usb-connector", 0);
>       |                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:17: error: assignment to 'struct device_node *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
>   694 |         np_conn = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node, "richtek,usb-connector", 0);
>       |                 ^
> drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:695:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_get_parent'; did you mean 'kernfs_get_parent'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   695 |         np_edev = of_get_parent(np_conn);
>       |                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
>       |                   kernfs_get_parent
> drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:695:17: error: assignment to 'struct device_node *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
>   695 |         np_edev = of_get_parent(np_conn);
>       |                 ^
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   2ce8284c3115 ("power: Explicitly include correct DT includes")
> 
> interacting with commit
> 
>   12cc585f36b8 ("power: supply: rt5033_charger: Add cable detection and USB OTG supply")
> 
> from the mfd tree.
> 
> I have applied the following merge fix patch.
> 
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:50:12 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "power: Explicitly include correct DT includes"
> 
> interacting with commit
> 
>   12cc585f36b8 ("power: supply: rt5033_charger: Add cable detection and USB OTG supply")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> ---
>  drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c b/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
> index 4d1198d752b7..4ea769775fa5 100644
> --- a/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
>  #include <linux/extcon.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/mutex.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>  #include <linux/power_supply.h>
>  #include <linux/regmap.h>
> -- 
> 2.40.1
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Lee Jones]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Lee Jones wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c: In function 'rt5033_charger_probe':
> > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_parse_phandle' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 
> Is this because your merge-conflict patch:
> 
>   linux-next: manual merge of the battery tree with the mfd tree
> 
>  ... removed of_device.h?

Oh, that was Rob's patch.  I see now, thanks.

> >   694 |         np_conn = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node, "richtek,usb-connector", 0);
> >       |                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:17: error: assignment to 'struct device_node *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> >   694 |         np_conn = of_parse_phandle(pdev->dev.of_node, "richtek,usb-connector", 0);
> >       |                 ^
> > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:695:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_get_parent'; did you mean 'kernfs_get_parent'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >   695 |         np_edev = of_get_parent(np_conn);
> >       |                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >       |                   kernfs_get_parent
> > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:695:17: error: assignment to 'struct device_node *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> >   695 |         np_edev = of_get_parent(np_conn);
> >       |                 ^
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   2ce8284c3115 ("power: Explicitly include correct DT includes")
> > 
> > interacting with commit
> > 
> >   12cc585f36b8 ("power: supply: rt5033_charger: Add cable detection and USB OTG supply")
> > 
> > from the mfd tree.
> > 
> > I have applied the following merge fix patch.
> > 
> > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 12:50:12 +1000
> > Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "power: Explicitly include correct DT includes"
> > 
> > interacting with commit
> > 
> >   12cc585f36b8 ("power: supply: rt5033_charger: Add cable detection and USB OTG supply")
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> > ---
> >  drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c b/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
> > index 4d1198d752b7..4ea769775fa5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
> > +++ b/drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c
> > @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/extcon.h>
> >  #include <linux/module.h>
> >  #include <linux/mutex.h>
> > +#include <linux/of.h>
> >  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> >  #include <linux/power_supply.h>
> >  #include <linux/regmap.h>
> > -- 
> > 2.40.1
> > 
> > -- 
> > Cheers,
> > Stephen Rothwell
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Lee Jones [李琼斯]

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Rob Herring]

On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 2:13 AM Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > >
> > > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c: In function 'rt5033_charger_probe':
> > > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_parse_phandle' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >
> > Is this because your merge-conflict patch:
> >
> >   linux-next: manual merge of the battery tree with the mfd tree
> >
> >  ... removed of_device.h?
>
> Oh, that was Rob's patch.  I see now, thanks.

Presumably the functions below got added and failed to add of.h and
instead relied on of_device.h's implicit include of of.h which is
going to get removed. So Stephen's fix is the correct one.

Rob

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Lee Jones]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Rob Herring wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 2:13 AM Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > > >
> > > > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c: In function 'rt5033_charger_probe':
> > > > drivers/power/supply/rt5033_charger.c:694:19: error: implicit declaration of function 'of_parse_phandle' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >
> > > Is this because your merge-conflict patch:
> > >
> > >   linux-next: manual merge of the battery tree with the mfd tree
> > >
> > >  ... removed of_device.h?
> >
> > Oh, that was Rob's patch.  I see now, thanks.
> 
> Presumably the functions below got added and failed to add of.h and
> instead relied on of_device.h's implicit include of of.h which is
> going to get removed. So Stephen's fix is the correct one.

Super.

Stephen, would you mind submitting it in a format we can apply?

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 698 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c: In function 'pwr_mlxbf_probe':
drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c:67:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_work_autocancel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
   67 |         err = devm_work_autocancel(dev, &priv->send_work, pwr_mlxbf_send_work);
      |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

Caused by commit

  a4c0094fcf76 ("power: reset: pwr-mlxbf: add BlueField SoC power control driver")

I have used the battery tree from next-20220617 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

RE: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Asmaa Mnebhi]

I will send a patch right away. Need to include #include <linux/devm-helpers.h>

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> 
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2022 8:45 PM
To: Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org>
Cc: Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@nvidia.com>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

Hi all,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c: In function 'pwr_mlxbf_probe':
drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c:67:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_work_autocancel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
   67 |         err = devm_work_autocancel(dev, &priv->send_work, pwr_mlxbf_send_work);
      |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

Caused by commit

  a4c0094fcf76 ("power: reset: pwr-mlxbf: add BlueField SoC power control driver")

I have used the battery tree from next-20220617 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 848 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Mon, 20 Jun 2022 10:45:03 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c: In function 'pwr_mlxbf_probe':
> drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c:67:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_work_autocancel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>    67 |         err = devm_work_autocancel(dev, &priv->send_work, pwr_mlxbf_send_work);
>       |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   a4c0094fcf76 ("power: reset: pwr-mlxbf: add BlueField SoC power control driver")
> 
> I have used the battery tree from next-20220617 for today.

I am still seeing this failure.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

RE: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Asmaa Mnebhi]

I sent a patch on Tuesday and added you as a reviewer. Could you please take a look?
The name of the email/patch: "[PATCH v1 1/1] linux-next: Fix build failure in pwr-mlxbf.c"

Thanks.
Asmaa

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> 
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2022 10:48 PM
To: Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org>
Cc: Asmaa Mnebhi <asmaa@nvidia.com>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

Hi all,

On Mon, 20 Jun 2022 10:45:03 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c: In function 'pwr_mlxbf_probe':
> drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c:67:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_work_autocancel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>    67 |         err = devm_work_autocancel(dev, &priv->send_work, pwr_mlxbf_send_work);
>       |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   a4c0094fcf76 ("power: reset: pwr-mlxbf: add BlueField SoC power control driver")
> 
> I have used the battery tree from next-20220617 for today.

I am still seeing this failure.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1008 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Fri, 24 Jun 2022 12:47:30 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2022 10:45:03 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > 
> > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c: In function 'pwr_mlxbf_probe':
> > drivers/power/reset/pwr-mlxbf.c:67:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_work_autocancel' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >    67 |         err = devm_work_autocancel(dev, &priv->send_work, pwr_mlxbf_send_work);
> >       |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   a4c0094fcf76 ("power: reset: pwr-mlxbf: add BlueField SoC power control driver")
> > 
> > I have used the battery tree from next-20220617 for today.  
> 
> I am still seeing this failure.

I am still getting this failure.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1618 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c: In function 'bq27xxx_battery_update':
drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c:1767:14: error: unused variable 'has_ci_flag' [-Werror=unused-variable]
 1767 |         bool has_ci_flag = di->opts & BQ27XXX_O_HAS_CI;
      |              ^~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

Caused by commit

  698502318f51 ("power: supply: bq27xxx: expose battery data when CI=1")

I have applied the following patch for today:

From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2022 12:31:47 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] power: supply: bq27xxx: remove unused variable

Fixes: 698502318f51 ("power: supply: bq27xxx: expose battery data when CI=1")
Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
---
 drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c b/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c
index 9adc7f43bbfd..35e6a394c0df 100644
--- a/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c
+++ b/drivers/power/supply/bq27xxx_battery.c
@@ -1764,7 +1764,6 @@ static int bq27xxx_battery_read_health(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di)
 void bq27xxx_battery_update(struct bq27xxx_device_info *di)
 {
 	struct bq27xxx_reg_cache cache = {0, };
-	bool has_ci_flag = di->opts & BQ27XXX_O_HAS_CI;
 	bool has_singe_flag = di->opts & BQ27XXX_O_ZERO;
 
 	cache.flags = bq27xxx_read(di, BQ27XXX_REG_FLAGS, has_singe_flag);
-- 
2.35.1

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 387 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

ERROR: "machine_restart" [drivers/power/reset/restart-poweroff.ko] undefined!

Caused by commit

  263ec7d0c497 ("power: reset: Enable tristate on restart power-off driver")

I have used the bettery tree from next-20191218 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Sebastian Reichel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 616 bytes --]

Hi Stephen,

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:01:44AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> ERROR: "machine_restart" [drivers/power/reset/restart-poweroff.ko] undefined!
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   263ec7d0c497 ("power: reset: Enable tristate on restart power-off driver")

Thanks, I already dropped that commit after noticing the problem myself.

> I have used the bettery tree from next-20191218 for today.

Maybe renaming the battery tree to bettery helps to get only good
patches? :)

-- Sebastian

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1108 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c: In function 'wilco_charge_get_property':
drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c:104:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'wilco_ec_get_byte_property'; did you mean 'wilco_charge_get_property'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  ret = wilco_ec_get_byte_property(ec, property_id, &raw);
        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        wilco_charge_get_property
drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c: In function 'wilco_charge_set_property':
drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c:130:10: error: implicit declaration of function 'wilco_ec_set_byte_property'; did you mean 'wilco_charge_set_property'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
   return wilco_ec_set_byte_property(ec, PID_CHARGE_MODE, mode);
          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          wilco_charge_set_property

Caused by commit

  0736343e4c56 ("power_supply: wilco_ec: Add charging config driver")

I have reverted that commit for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Sebastian Reichel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1318 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 02:03:04PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c: In function 'wilco_charge_get_property':
> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c:104:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'wilco_ec_get_byte_property'; did you mean 'wilco_charge_get_property'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   ret = wilco_ec_get_byte_property(ec, property_id, &raw);
>         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>         wilco_charge_get_property
> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c: In function 'wilco_charge_set_property':
> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c:130:10: error: implicit declaration of function 'wilco_ec_set_byte_property'; did you mean 'wilco_charge_set_property'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>    return wilco_ec_set_byte_property(ec, PID_CHARGE_MODE, mode);
>           ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>           wilco_charge_set_property
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   0736343e4c56 ("power_supply: wilco_ec: Add charging config driver")
> 
> I have reverted that commit for today.

Oops, thanks for the hint. I did not notice this with ARM
allmodconfig. I dropped the patch for this cycle.

-- Sebastian

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Enric Balletbo i Serra]

Hi,

On 28/6/19 17:31, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 02:03:04PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c: In function 'wilco_charge_get_property':
>> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c:104:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'wilco_ec_get_byte_property'; did you mean 'wilco_charge_get_property'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>   ret = wilco_ec_get_byte_property(ec, property_id, &raw);
>>         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>         wilco_charge_get_property
>> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c: In function 'wilco_charge_set_property':
>> drivers/power/supply/wilco-charger.c:130:10: error: implicit declaration of function 'wilco_ec_set_byte_property'; did you mean 'wilco_charge_set_property'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>    return wilco_ec_set_byte_property(ec, PID_CHARGE_MODE, mode);
>>           ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>           wilco_charge_set_property
>>
>> Caused by commit
>>
>>   0736343e4c56 ("power_supply: wilco_ec: Add charging config driver")
>>

Hmm, I just applied this patch on top of linux-next and it build with
allmodconfig on x86_64

I am wondering if the build was done without this commit, which is in
chrome-platform for-next branch. Could be this the problem?

commit 0c0b7ea23aed0b55ef2f9803f13ddaae1943713d
Author: Nick Crews <ncrews@chromium.org>
Date:   Wed Apr 24 10:56:50 2019 -0600

    platform/chrome: wilco_ec: Add property helper library


Anyway, I think the proper way to do it is create an immutable branch for
Sebastian as the patch he picked depends on the above commit. I'll create one,
sorry about that missing dependency.

Thanks,
~ Enric


>> I have reverted that commit for today.
> 
> Oops, thanks for the hint. I did not notice this with ARM
> allmodconfig. I dropped the patch for this cycle.
> 
> -- Sebastian
> 

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 920 bytes --]

Hi Enric,

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 18:56:56 +0200 Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm, I just applied this patch on top of linux-next and it build with
> allmodconfig on x86_64
> 
> I am wondering if the build was done without this commit, which is in
> chrome-platform for-next branch. Could be this the problem?
> 
> commit 0c0b7ea23aed0b55ef2f9803f13ddaae1943713d
> Author: Nick Crews <ncrews@chromium.org>
> Date:   Wed Apr 24 10:56:50 2019 -0600
> 
>     platform/chrome: wilco_ec: Add property helper library

Exactly since I merge the battery tree before the chrome-platform
tree ... Cross tree dependencies are a pain.

> Anyway, I think the proper way to do it is create an immutable branch for
> Sebastian as the patch he picked depends on the above commit. I'll create one,
> sorry about that missing dependency.

Thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Enric Balletbo i Serra]

Hi Sebastian,

In case is not too late for you. Otherwise we will need to wait for next cycle.

The following changes since commit a188339ca5a396acc588e5851ed7e19f66b0ebd9:

  Linux 5.2-rc1 (2019-05-19 15:47:09 -0700)

are available in the Git repository at:

  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chrome-platform/linux.git
tags/ib-chrome-psy-5.3

for you to fetch changes up to 0c0b7ea23aed0b55ef2f9803f13ddaae1943713d:

  platform/chrome: wilco_ec: Add property helper library (2019-05-20 10:18:09 +0200)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Immutable branch between Power Supply and Chrome Platform due for the v5.3 merge
window

----------------------------------------------------------------
Nick Crews (1):
      platform/chrome: wilco_ec: Add property helper library

 drivers/platform/chrome/wilco_ec/Makefile     |   2 +-
 drivers/platform/chrome/wilco_ec/properties.c | 132 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/platform_data/wilco-ec.h        |  71 ++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 204 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 drivers/platform/chrome/wilco_ec/properties.c



On 29/6/19 2:33, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Enric,
> 
> On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 18:56:56 +0200 Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@collabora.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, I just applied this patch on top of linux-next and it build with
>> allmodconfig on x86_64
>>
>> I am wondering if the build was done without this commit, which is in
>> chrome-platform for-next branch. Could be this the problem?
>>
>> commit 0c0b7ea23aed0b55ef2f9803f13ddaae1943713d
>> Author: Nick Crews <ncrews@chromium.org>
>> Date:   Wed Apr 24 10:56:50 2019 -0600
>>
>>     platform/chrome: wilco_ec: Add property helper library
> 
> Exactly since I merge the battery tree before the chrome-platform
> tree ... Cross tree dependencies are a pain.
> 
>> Anyway, I think the proper way to do it is create an immutable branch for
>> Sebastian as the patch he picked depends on the above commit. I'll create one,
>> sorry about that missing dependency.
> 
> Thanks.
> 

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Sebastian,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:

ERROR (phandle_references): Reference to non-existent node or label "twl4030_madc"
ERROR: Input tree has errors, aborting (use -f to force output)
scripts/Makefile.lib:293: recipe for target 'arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle-xm-ab.dtb' failed

and many more ...

Caused by commit

  af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio properties for bci subnode")

Presumably some updates to other files were missed.

I have used the battery tree from next-20150925 fot today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Sebastian,

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:45:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> ERROR (phandle_references): Reference to non-existent node or label "twl4030_madc"
> ERROR: Input tree has errors, aborting (use -f to force output)
> scripts/Makefile.lib:293: recipe for target 'arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle-xm-ab.dtb' failed
> 
> and many more ...
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio properties for bci subnode")
> 
> Presumably some updates to other files were missed.
> 
> I have used the battery tree from next-20150925 fot today.

I am still getting this error.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Sebastian,

On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 11:49:32 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:45:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > ERROR (phandle_references): Reference to non-existent node or label "twl4030_madc"
> > ERROR: Input tree has errors, aborting (use -f to force output)
> > scripts/Makefile.lib:293: recipe for target 'arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle-xm-ab.dtb' failed
> > 
> > and many more ...
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio properties for bci subnode")
> > 
> > Presumably some updates to other files were missed.
> > 
> > I have used the battery tree from next-20150925 fot today.
> 
> I am still getting this error.

Ping?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Belisko Marek]

Hi Stephen,

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 11:49:32 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:45:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> >
>> > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (arm
>> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>> >
>> > ERROR (phandle_references): Reference to non-existent node or label "twl4030_madc"
>> > ERROR: Input tree has errors, aborting (use -f to force output)
>> > scripts/Makefile.lib:293: recipe for target 'arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle-xm-ab.dtb' failed
>> >
>> > and many more ...
>> >
>> > Caused by commit
>> >
>> >   af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio properties for bci subnode")
>> >
>> > Presumably some updates to other files were missed.
>> >
>> > I have used the battery tree from next-20150925 fot today.
>>
>> I am still getting this error.
>
> Ping?
I did test it and it builds fine (multi_v7_defconfig). My HEAD is on
dad463bdcbb41dfd17c799a5653bb57f185f2c76
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

BR,

marek

-- 
as simple and primitive as possible
-------------------------------------------------
Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA
Freelance Developer

Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic
Tel: +421 915 052 184
skype: marekwhite
twitter: #opennandra
web: http://open-nandra.com

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Belisko,

On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 08:12:06 +0200 Belisko Marek <marek.belisko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I did test it and it builds fine (multi_v7_defconfig). My HEAD is on
> dad463bdcbb41dfd17c799a5653bb57f185f2c76

That is next-20151002 which does not contain the broken commit.  I am
using the battery tree that was included in next-20150925 which is the
last time it worked for me.  The head of the battery tree them was
3636859b280ca595da4556274a509223f47e9a39 ("power_supply: Add support
for tps65217-charger."), it is now
6169588f69f864c39f04e6d65cc620e58822aec5 ("Documentation: power:
bq24257: Document exported sysfs entries") (and has been for some
time).  The bad commit is af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio
properties for bci subnode").

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Sebastian,

On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 12:04:24 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 11:49:32 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:45:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:  
> > >
> > > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> > > 
> > > ERROR (phandle_references): Reference to non-existent node or label "twl4030_madc"
> > > ERROR: Input tree has errors, aborting (use -f to force output)
> > > scripts/Makefile.lib:293: recipe for target 'arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle-xm-ab.dtb' failed
> > > 
> > > and many more ...
> > > 
> > > Caused by commit
> > > 
> > >   af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio properties for bci subnode")
> > > 
> > > Presumably some updates to other files were missed.
> > > 
> > > I have used the battery tree from next-20150925 fot today.  
> > 
> > I am still getting this error.  
> 
> Ping?

I still got this error today ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Sebastian,

On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 01:26:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 12:04:24 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 11:49:32 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:  
> > >
> > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:45:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:    
> > > >
> > > > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > > > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> > > > 
> > > > ERROR (phandle_references): Reference to non-existent node or label "twl4030_madc"
> > > > ERROR: Input tree has errors, aborting (use -f to force output)
> > > > scripts/Makefile.lib:293: recipe for target 'arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle-xm-ab.dtb' failed
> > > > 
> > > > and many more ...
> > > > 
> > > > Caused by commit
> > > > 
> > > >   af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio properties for bci subnode")
> > > > 
> > > > Presumably some updates to other files were missed.
> > > > 
> > > > I have used the battery tree from next-20150925 fot today.    
> > > 
> > > I am still getting this error.    
> > 
> > Ping?  
> 
> I still got this error today ...

And still ... This has been going on for 4 weeks now ... either revert
the commit or get it fixed.  Nothing added to the battery tree since
September 25 has been able to be tested in linux-next.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Belisko Marek]

Adding Tony to CC

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 01:26:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 12:04:24 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 11:49:32 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:45:31 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (arm
>> > > > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>> > > >
>> > > > ERROR (phandle_references): Reference to non-existent node or label "twl4030_madc"
>> > > > ERROR: Input tree has errors, aborting (use -f to force output)
>> > > > scripts/Makefile.lib:293: recipe for target 'arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-beagle-xm-ab.dtb' failed
>> > > >
>> > > > and many more ...
>> > > >
>> > > > Caused by commit
>> > > >
>> > > >   af19161aaed7 ("ARM: dts: twl4030: Add iio properties for bci subnode")
>> > > >
>> > > > Presumably some updates to other files were missed.
>> > > >
>> > > > I have used the battery tree from next-20150925 fot today.
>> > >
>> > > I am still getting this error.
>> >
>> > Ping?
>>
>> I still got this error today ...
>
> And still ... This has been going on for 4 weeks now ... either revert
> the commit or get it fixed.  Nothing added to the battery tree since
> September 25 has been able to be tested in linux-next.
I posted last week fix [0]. Tony can you please merge it? Thanks.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[0] - https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/13/816

BR,

marek

-- 
as simple and primitive as possible
-------------------------------------------------
Marek Belisko - OPEN-NANDRA
Freelance Developer

Ruska Nova Ves 219 | Presov, 08005 Slovak Republic
Tel: +421 915 052 184
skype: marekwhite
twitter: #opennandra
web: http://open-nandra.com

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Sebastian,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/reset/zx-reboot.c:21:26: fatal error: asm/proc-fns.h: No such file or directory
 #include <asm/proc-fns.h>
                          ^

Caused by commit

  dd9f1486ae20 ("power/reset: zx: Register restart handler")

I have used the battery tree from next-20150724 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 750 bytes --]

Hi Anton,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/built-in.o: In function `charger_manager_probe':
charger-manager.c:(.text+0x11d61a): undefined reference to `extcon_register_interest'
charger-manager.c:(.text+0x11d7b6): undefined reference to `extcon_unregister_interest'
drivers/built-in.o: In function `charger_manager_remove':
charger-manager.c:(.devexit.text+0x8f3): undefined reference to `extcon_unregister_interest'

Caused by commit bee737bccb03 ("charger-manager: Use EXTCON Subsystem to
detect charger cables for charging").

I have used the battery tree from next-20120713 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Chanwoo Choi]

Hi Stephen,

On 07/16/2012 01:09 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi Anton,
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `charger_manager_probe':
> charger-manager.c:(.text+0x11d61a): undefined reference to `extcon_register_interest'
> charger-manager.c:(.text+0x11d7b6): undefined reference to `extcon_unregister_interest'
> drivers/built-in.o: In function `charger_manager_remove':
> charger-manager.c:(.devexit.text+0x8f3): undefined reference to `extcon_unregister_interest'
> 
> Caused by commit bee737bccb03 ("charger-manager: Use EXTCON Subsystem to
> detect charger cables for charging").
> 
> I have used the battery tree from next-20120713 for today.


I'm so sorry, It is my mistake.
So, I resend below patch to fix build break of charger-manager.
- http://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/16/5

Best Regards,
Chanwoo Choi

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1890 bytes --]

Hi Anton,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_batctrl_volt_to_res':
drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:142:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_templow_handler':
drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:619:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_2p0_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_ac_en':
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:1126:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_remove':
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2519:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_unregister_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2520:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_put_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_probe':
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_get_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:14: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2695:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_register_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

Caused by commits 89449ac8d6d2 ("ab8500-charger: AB8500 charger driver")
and 20ac1aed6206 ("ab8500-btemp: AB8500 battery temperature driver").

I have used the battery tree form next-20120314 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2057 bytes --]

Hi Anton,

On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:56:09 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_batctrl_volt_to_res':
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:142:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_templow_handler':
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:619:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_2p0_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_ac_en':
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:1126:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_remove':
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2519:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_unregister_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2520:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_put_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_probe':
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_get_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:14: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2695:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_register_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 
> Caused by commits 89449ac8d6d2 ("ab8500-charger: AB8500 charger driver")
> and 20ac1aed6206 ("ab8500-btemp: AB8500 battery temperature driver").
> 
> I have used the battery tree form next-20120314 for today.

Still getting this build failure.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2200 bytes --]

Hi Anton,

On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:39:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:56:09 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_batctrl_volt_to_res':
> > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:142:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_templow_handler':
> > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:619:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_2p0_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_ac_en':
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:1126:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_remove':
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2519:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_unregister_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2520:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_put_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_probe':
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_get_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:14: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
> > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2695:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_register_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 
> > Caused by commits 89449ac8d6d2 ("ab8500-charger: AB8500 charger driver")
> > and 20ac1aed6206 ("ab8500-btemp: AB8500 battery temperature driver").
> > 
> > I have used the battery tree form next-20120314 for today.
> 
> Still getting this build failure.

Ping?
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

RE: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Arun MURTHY]

> > > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function
> 'ab8500_btemp_batctrl_volt_to_res':
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:142:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function
> 'ab8500_btemp_templow_handler':
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:619:2: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function 'is_ab8500_2p0_or_earlier'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_ac_en':
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:1126:3: error: implicit declaration
> > > of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function
> 'ab8500_charger_remove':
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2519:2: error: implicit declaration
> > > of function 'usb_unregister_notifier'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2520:2: error: implicit declaration
> > > of function 'usb_put_transceiver'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_probe':
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:2: error: implicit declaration
> > > of function 'usb_get_transceiver'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:14: warning: assignment makes
> > > pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
> > > drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2695:2: error: implicit declaration
> > > of function 'usb_register_notifier'
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >
> > > Caused by commits 89449ac8d6d2 ("ab8500-charger: AB8500 charger
> > > driver") and 20ac1aed6206 ("ab8500-btemp: AB8500 battery
> temperature driver").
> > >
> > > I have used the battery tree form next-20120314 for today.
> >
> > Still getting this build failure.

There is a dependency with MFD tree. Please pull the MFD tree along with
these patches to overcome the build errors.

Thanks and Regards,
Arun R Murthy
-------------

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Linus Walleij]

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:31 AM, Arun MURTHY <arun.murthy@stericsson.com> wrote:

> There is a dependency with MFD tree. Please pull the MFD tree along with
> these patches to overcome the build errors.

Maybe the problem is that the needed MFD changes have not reached
the MFD for-next branch? (To me that looks like the actual issue.)
I think Anton pulled these in to some branch to test it and had it working
fine so some cross-dependency issue...

Yours,
Linus Walleij

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Anton Vorontsov]

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 08:55:37AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:31 AM, Arun MURTHY <arun.murthy@stericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> > There is a dependency with MFD tree. Please pull the MFD tree along with
> > these patches to overcome the build errors.
> 
> Maybe the problem is that the needed MFD changes have not reached
> the MFD for-next branch? (To me that looks like the actual issue.)
> I think Anton pulled these in to some branch to test it and had it working
> fine so some cross-dependency issue...

Yes, exactly. I don't know what happened with MFD-related chanes in -next,
I'll take a look...

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Samuel Ortiz]

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 08:55:37AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:31 AM, Arun MURTHY <arun.murthy@stericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> > There is a dependency with MFD tree. Please pull the MFD tree along with
> > these patches to overcome the build errors.
> 
> Maybe the problem is that the needed MFD changes have not reached
> the MFD for-next branch? (To me that looks like the actual issue.)
Which changes are missing from for-next ?

Cheers,
Samuel.

-- 
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Anton Vorontsov]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 01:56:09PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Anton,
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_batctrl_volt_to_res':
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:142:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c: In function 'ab8500_btemp_templow_handler':
> drivers/power/ab8500_btemp.c:619:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_2p0_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_ac_en':
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:1126:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_ab8500_1p1_or_earlier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_remove':
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2519:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_unregister_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2520:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_put_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c: In function 'ab8500_charger_probe':
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_get_transceiver' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2688:14: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast [enabled by default]
> drivers/power/ab8500_charger.c:2695:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_register_notifier' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 
> Caused by commits 89449ac8d6d2 ("ab8500-charger: AB8500 charger driver")
> and 20ac1aed6206 ("ab8500-btemp: AB8500 battery temperature driver").
> 
> I have used the battery tree form next-20120314 for today.

I pulled my current battery tree into next-20120326, and I can't reproduce
the issue (using allmodconfig on x86_64).

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 958 bytes --]

Hi Anton,

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 20:11:32 +0400 Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I pulled my current battery tree into next-20120326, and I can't reproduce
> the issue (using allmodconfig on x86_64).

I have moved the battery tree to after the mfd tree in my merge sequence
so we will see if that helps.  I really hate having ordering dependencies
in linux-next (since they change over time and people have to remember to
tell me and to send stuff to Linus in the right order).  Also, it means
that you are not testing exactly what you are sending to me - I assume
that your testing must be including the mfd tree somehow.

These sort of things should be fixed by having the common code in a
separate (stable) branch that is merged into both trees.  Or in some
cases by merely cherry-picking a very small number of commits from one
tree to the other.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 716 bytes --]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:44:14 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> I have moved the battery tree to after the mfd tree in my merge sequence
> so we will see if that helps.  I really hate having ordering dependencies
> in linux-next (since they change over time and people have to remember to
> tell me and to send stuff to Linus in the right order).  Also, it means
> that you are not testing exactly what you are sending to me - I assume
> that your testing must be including the mfd tree somehow.

And, if anyone else is using your tree as a base for development, they
must also know about this dependency ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Anton Vorontsov]

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 08:44:14AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Anton,
> 
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 20:11:32 +0400 Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I pulled my current battery tree into next-20120326, and I can't reproduce
> > the issue (using allmodconfig on x86_64).
> 
> I have moved the battery tree to after the mfd tree in my merge sequence
> so we will see if that helps.  I really hate having ordering dependencies
> in linux-next (since they change over time and people have to remember to
> tell me and to send stuff to Linus in the right order).  Also, it means
> that you are not testing exactly what you are sending to me - I assume
> that your testing must be including the mfd tree somehow.
> 
> These sort of things should be fixed by having the common code in a
> separate (stable) branch that is merged into both trees.  Or in some
> cases by merely cherry-picking a very small number of commits from one
> tree to the other.

Yes, I was thinking about cherry-picking a few MFD patches, but
decided not to as the driver is quite big and completely new, so
it would have some glitches anyway, and thus would need fixups.
One less, one more.

But for such drivers I usually give my 'Acked-by' so that
patches could be merged via single tree (i.e. mfd). But nobody
asked me in this case.

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 05:03:50PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:

> But for such drivers I usually give my 'Acked-by' so that
> patches could be merged via single tree (i.e. mfd). But nobody
> asked me in this case.

Well, for completely new MFDs there's no need as the dependency on the
core will generally sort everything out.  It's only adding things to an
existing MFD that might have some issues.

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1173 bytes --]

Hi Anton,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_bat_read_volt':
drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:293:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'da9052_adc_manual_read' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_bat_check_presence':
drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:306:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'da9052_adc_read_temp' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
drivers/power/da9052-battery.c: In function 'da9052_determine_vc_tbl_index':
drivers/power/da9052-battery.c:348:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors

Caused by commit ded7fc7b0550 ("power_supply: Add DA9052 battery driver").

The commit message says "This driver depends on DA9052 MFD core dirver
for definitions and methods".  That core is presumably still pending
inclusion.

I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 515 bytes --]

Hi Anton,

After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

ERROR: "sysfs_create_link_nowarn" [drivers/power/power_supply.ko] undefined!

Caused by commit 8351665195ce ("power_supply: allow a power supply to
explicitly point to powered device").  That symbol is not exported to
modules.

I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Anton Vorontsov]

On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 02:40:42PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Anton,
> 
> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> ERROR: "sysfs_create_link_nowarn" [drivers/power/power_supply.ko] undefined!
> 
> Caused by commit 8351665195ce ("power_supply: allow a power supply to
> explicitly point to powered device").  That symbol is not exported to
> modules.
> 
> I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.

Thanks for catching this, Stephen!

I wonder why do we need to use _nowarn variant?..

Something tells me that we actually want a warning.

Jeremy, are you OK with the patch down below?

- - - -
From: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com>
Subject: power_supply: Drop usage of nowarn variant of sysfs_create_link()

The function is not exported to modules, plus we do want to catch anyone
who tries to create complex hierarchy (in that case we'd need to change
'powers' symlink to a directory, probably under a different name to not
break ABI).

This patch fixes the following build error:

 ERROR: "sysfs_create_link_nowarn" [drivers/power/power_supply.ko] undefined!

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/power/power_supply_core.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c b/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c
index b10c121..47f4e11 100644
--- a/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c
+++ b/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c
@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(power_supply_get_by_name);
 
 int power_supply_powers(struct power_supply *psy, struct device *dev)
 {
-	return sysfs_create_link_nowarn(&psy->dev->kobj, &dev->kobj, "powers");
+	return sysfs_create_link(&psy->dev->kobj, &dev->kobj, "powers");
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(power_supply_powers);
 
-- 
1.7.7.3

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 07:25:36PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 02:40:42PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Anton,
> > 
> > After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > ERROR: "sysfs_create_link_nowarn" [drivers/power/power_supply.ko] undefined!
> > 
> > Caused by commit 8351665195ce ("power_supply: allow a power supply to
> > explicitly point to powered device").  That symbol is not exported to
> > modules.
> > 
> > I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
> 
> Thanks for catching this, Stephen!
> 
> I wonder why do we need to use _nowarn variant?..
> 
> Something tells me that we actually want a warning.

Yes, no one other than the driver core should ever be calling this
function, that is why it is not exported.

And I'm guessing, hopefully, that this sysfs link you are creating, is
also being documented in Documentation/ABI/ right?  If not, it must be.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the battery tree

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 01/06/2012 02:25 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 02:40:42PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Anton,
>>
>> After merging the battery tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> ERROR: "sysfs_create_link_nowarn" [drivers/power/power_supply.ko] undefined!
>>
>> Caused by commit 8351665195ce ("power_supply: allow a power supply to
>> explicitly point to powered device").  That symbol is not exported to
>> modules.
>>
>> I have used the battery tree from next-20120104 for today.
> Thanks for catching this, Stephen!
>
> I wonder why do we need to use _nowarn variant?..
>
> Something tells me that we actually want a warning.
>
> Jeremy, are you OK with the patch down below?

Yep, that's fine.

    J

>
> - - - -
> From: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com>
> Subject: power_supply: Drop usage of nowarn variant of sysfs_create_link()
>
> The function is not exported to modules, plus we do want to catch anyone
> who tries to create complex hierarchy (in that case we'd need to change
> 'powers' symlink to a directory, probably under a different name to not
> break ABI).
>
> This patch fixes the following build error:
>
>  ERROR: "sysfs_create_link_nowarn" [drivers/power/power_supply.ko] undefined!
>
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/power/power_supply_core.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c b/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c
> index b10c121..47f4e11 100644
> --- a/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/power/power_supply_core.c
> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(power_supply_get_by_name);
>  
>  int power_supply_powers(struct power_supply *psy, struct device *dev)
>  {
> -	return sysfs_create_link_nowarn(&psy->dev->kobj, &dev->kobj, "powers");
> +	return sysfs_create_link(&psy->dev->kobj, &dev->kobj, "powers");
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(power_supply_powers);
>