* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
@ 2023-10-13 4:14 Stephen Rothwell
2023-10-13 6:44 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2023-10-13 4:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, Dipen Patel, Andy Shevchenko,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1539 bytes --]
Hi all,
After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c: In function 'tegra_hte_line_xlate':
drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c:424:48: error: implicit declaration of function 'gpio_device_get_base'; did you mean 'gpio_device_get_desc'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
424 | line_id = desc->attr.line_id - gpio_device_get_base(gs->gdev);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| gpio_device_get_desc
drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c: In function 'tegra_hte_match_from_linedata':
drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c:652:33: error: implicit declaration of function 'gpiod_to_device'; did you mean 'gpio_to_desc'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
652 | gpiod_to_device(hdesc->attr.line_data);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| gpio_to_desc
drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c:652:33: error: initialization of 'struct gpio_device *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Caused by commit
ebee532ff34b ("hte: tegra194: don't access struct gpio_chip")
(Exposed by commit
63137bee5a7a ("hte: allow building modules with COMPILE_TEST enabled")
from the hte tree.)
I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20231012 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2023-10-13 4:14 linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2023-10-13 6:44 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Bartosz Golaszewski @ 2023-10-13 6:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, Dipen Patel, Andy Shevchenko,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 at 06:14, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c: In function 'tegra_hte_line_xlate':
> drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c:424:48: error: implicit declaration of function 'gpio_device_get_base'; did you mean 'gpio_device_get_desc'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 424 | line_id = desc->attr.line_id - gpio_device_get_base(gs->gdev);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | gpio_device_get_desc
> drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c: In function 'tegra_hte_match_from_linedata':
> drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c:652:33: error: implicit declaration of function 'gpiod_to_device'; did you mean 'gpio_to_desc'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 652 | gpiod_to_device(hdesc->attr.line_data);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | gpio_to_desc
> drivers/hte/hte-tegra194.c:652:33: error: initialization of 'struct gpio_device *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> Caused by commit
>
> ebee532ff34b ("hte: tegra194: don't access struct gpio_chip")
>
> (Exposed by commit
>
> 63137bee5a7a ("hte: allow building modules with COMPILE_TEST enabled")
>
> from the hte tree.)
>
> I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20231012 for today.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Gah, we have a couple reworks going on at the same time and I messed
up the order of applying the patches. And the name of
gpiod_to_device() was changed to gpiod_to_gpio_device() and no longer
increases the reference count of the device.
Dipen, I backed out the HTE patch, I will fix it up and resend it
making sure it builds correctly with my gpio/for-next branch.
Bartosz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
@ 2024-02-23 3:33 Stephen Rothwell
2024-02-23 7:51 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2024-02-23 3:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Andy Shevchenko, Bartosz Golaszewski, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 806 bytes --]
Hi all,
After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64':
gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489427): undefined reference to `iowrite64'
x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64':
gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14894a0): undefined reference to `ioread64'
x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64be':
gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489527): undefined reference to `iowrite64be'
x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64be':
gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14895a0): undefined reference to `ioread64be'
Caused by commit
36e44186e0ba ("gpio: mmio: Support 64-bit BE access")
I have used the gpio-brgl from next-20240222 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2024-02-23 3:33 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2024-02-23 7:51 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2024-02-23 12:29 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-02-25 1:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Bartosz Golaszewski @ 2024-02-23 7:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, Andy Shevchenko, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List
On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 04:33, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64':
> gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489427): undefined reference to `iowrite64'
> x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64':
> gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14894a0): undefined reference to `ioread64'
> x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64be':
> gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489527): undefined reference to `iowrite64be'
> x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64be':
> gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14895a0): undefined reference to `ioread64be'
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 36e44186e0ba ("gpio: mmio: Support 64-bit BE access")
>
> I have used the gpio-brgl from next-20240222 for today.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Hi Stephen,
I'm not seeing this issue with allmodconfig on x86_64, could you give
me some more information on the build environment?
Andy: Could it be that the ifdefs you added should depend on
CONFIG_64BIT and not only on the BITS_PER_LONG value?
Bartosz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2024-02-23 7:51 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
@ 2024-02-23 12:29 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-02-25 1:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2024-02-23 12:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Stephen Rothwell, Bartosz Golaszewski, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 9:51 AM Bartosz Golaszewski
<bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 04:33, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489427): undefined reference to `iowrite64'
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14894a0): undefined reference to `ioread64'
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64be':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489527): undefined reference to `iowrite64be'
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64be':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14895a0): undefined reference to `ioread64be'
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 36e44186e0ba ("gpio: mmio: Support 64-bit BE access")
> >
> > I have used the gpio-brgl from next-20240222 for today.
> I'm not seeing this issue with allmodconfig on x86_64, could you give
> me some more information on the build environment?
>
> Andy: Could it be that the ifdefs you added should depend on
> CONFIG_64BIT and not only on the BITS_PER_LONG value?
If so, it will be the old issue as I just used what is currently done
for LE 64-bit accessors in the same file.
I think the problem here is different, i.e. io*64*() are not available
on all (64-bit) architectures in comparison to readq()/writeq().
I'll look at this later today.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2024-02-23 7:51 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2024-02-23 12:29 ` Andy Shevchenko
@ 2024-02-25 1:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
2024-02-26 19:07 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2024-02-25 1:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, Andy Shevchenko, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1361 bytes --]
Hi Bartosz,
On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 08:51:10 +0100 Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 04:33, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489427): undefined reference to `iowrite64'
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14894a0): undefined reference to `ioread64'
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64be':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489527): undefined reference to `iowrite64be'
> > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64be':
> > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14895a0): undefined reference to `ioread64be'
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 36e44186e0ba ("gpio: mmio: Support 64-bit BE access")
>
> I'm not seeing this issue with allmodconfig on x86_64, could you give
> me some more information on the build environment?
These builds are cross builds using Debian's cross compilers on a ppc64le host.
$ x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc --version
x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc (Debian 13.2.0-7) 13.2.0
$ x86_64-linux-gnu-ld --version
GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.41
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2024-02-25 1:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2024-02-26 19:07 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Bartosz Golaszewski @ 2024-02-26 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, Andy Shevchenko, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List
On Sun, 25 Feb 2024 at 02:58, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi Bartosz,
>
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 08:51:10 +0100 Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 04:33, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > >
> > > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64':
> > > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489427): undefined reference to `iowrite64'
> > > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64':
> > > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14894a0): undefined reference to `ioread64'
> > > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_write64be':
> > > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x1489527): undefined reference to `iowrite64be'
> > > x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: vmlinux.o: in function `bgpio_read64be':
> > > gpio-mmio.c:(.text+0x14895a0): undefined reference to `ioread64be'
> > >
> > > Caused by commit
> > >
> > > 36e44186e0ba ("gpio: mmio: Support 64-bit BE access")
> >
> > I'm not seeing this issue with allmodconfig on x86_64, could you give
> > me some more information on the build environment?
>
> These builds are cross builds using Debian's cross compilers on a ppc64le host.
>
> $ x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc --version
> x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc (Debian 13.2.0-7) 13.2.0
> $ x86_64-linux-gnu-ld --version
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.41
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
I dropped the offending commit from my for-next branch. Let's revisit
it after the upcoming merge window.
Bart
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
@ 2023-03-23 1:29 Stephen Rothwell
2023-03-22 19:50 ` William Breathitt Gray
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2023-03-23 1:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, William Breathitt Gray,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4788 bytes --]
Hi all,
After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:32:30: error: field 'state' has incomplete type
32 | struct idio_16_state state;
| ^~~~~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get_direction':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:39:13: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get_direction'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get_direction'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
39 | if (idio_16_get_direction(offset))
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| idio_16_gpio_get_direction
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:62:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
62 | return idio_16_get(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, offset);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~
| idio_16_gpio_get
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get_multiple':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:70:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get_multiple'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get_multiple'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
70 | idio_16_get_multiple(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, mask, bits);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| idio_16_gpio_get_multiple
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_set':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:79:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_set'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_set'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
79 | idio_16_set(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, offset, value);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~
| idio_16_gpio_set
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_set_multiple':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:87:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_set_multiple'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_set_multiple'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
87 | idio_16_set_multiple(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, mask, bits);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| idio_16_gpio_set_multiple
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_mask':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:106:45: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
106 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
| ^~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_unmask':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:129:41: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
129 | ioread8(&idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
| ^~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_handler':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:164:46: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
164 | irq_status = ioread8(&idio16gpio->reg->irq_status);
| ^~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:178:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
178 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->in0_7);
| ^~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_init_hw':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:198:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
198 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
| ^~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:199:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
199 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->in0_7);
| ^~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_probe':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:232:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
232 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->filter_ctl);
| ^~
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:248:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_state_init'; did you mean 'file_ra_state_init'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
248 | idio_16_state_init(&idio16gpio->state);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| file_ra_state_init
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:63:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
63 | }
| ^
Caused by commit
473b79057bbd ("gpio: idio-16: Remove unused legacy interface")
I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20230322 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2023-03-23 1:29 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2023-03-22 19:50 ` William Breathitt Gray
2023-03-23 13:32 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: William Breathitt Gray @ 2023-03-22 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, Bartosz Golaszewski, Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5611 bytes --]
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 12:29:13PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:32:30: error: field 'state' has incomplete type
> 32 | struct idio_16_state state;
> | ^~~~~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get_direction':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:39:13: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get_direction'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get_direction'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 39 | if (idio_16_get_direction(offset))
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | idio_16_gpio_get_direction
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:62:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 62 | return idio_16_get(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, offset);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~
> | idio_16_gpio_get
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get_multiple':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:70:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get_multiple'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get_multiple'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 70 | idio_16_get_multiple(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, mask, bits);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | idio_16_gpio_get_multiple
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_set':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:79:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_set'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_set'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 79 | idio_16_set(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, offset, value);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~
> | idio_16_gpio_set
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_set_multiple':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:87:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_set_multiple'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_set_multiple'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 87 | idio_16_set_multiple(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, mask, bits);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | idio_16_gpio_set_multiple
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_mask':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:106:45: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> 106 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
> | ^~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_unmask':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:129:41: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> 129 | ioread8(&idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
> | ^~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_handler':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:164:46: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> 164 | irq_status = ioread8(&idio16gpio->reg->irq_status);
> | ^~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:178:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> 178 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->in0_7);
> | ^~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_init_hw':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:198:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> 198 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
> | ^~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:199:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> 199 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->in0_7);
> | ^~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_probe':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:232:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> 232 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->filter_ctl);
> | ^~
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:248:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_state_init'; did you mean 'file_ra_state_init'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 248 | idio_16_state_init(&idio16gpio->state);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | file_ra_state_init
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:63:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
> 63 | }
> | ^
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 473b79057bbd ("gpio: idio-16: Remove unused legacy interface")
>
> I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20230322 for today.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Commit 473b79057bbd shouldn't be merged until all of the IDIO-16 legacy
interface is first removed.
Bart, would you revert all of the "Migrate IDIO-16 GPIO drivers to
regmap API" patches [0]? That patchset needs to be revised anyway to
prevent conflicts with the handle_mask_sync() API change [1]; I'll
submit a v3 later this week that resolves the incompatibilies and
rebase on the latest gpio/for-next.
William Breathitt Gray
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1677515341.git.william.gray@linaro.org/
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1679323449.git.william.gray@linaro.org/
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2023-03-22 19:50 ` William Breathitt Gray
@ 2023-03-23 13:32 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Bartosz Golaszewski @ 2023-03-23 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: William Breathitt Gray
Cc: Stephen Rothwell, Bartosz Golaszewski, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List
On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 at 02:47, William Breathitt Gray
<william.gray@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 12:29:13PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:32:30: error: field 'state' has incomplete type
> > 32 | struct idio_16_state state;
> > | ^~~~~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get_direction':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:39:13: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get_direction'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get_direction'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 39 | if (idio_16_get_direction(offset))
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | idio_16_gpio_get_direction
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:62:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 62 | return idio_16_get(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, offset);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~
> > | idio_16_gpio_get
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get_multiple':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:70:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_get_multiple'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_get_multiple'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 70 | idio_16_get_multiple(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, mask, bits);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | idio_16_gpio_get_multiple
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_set':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:79:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_set'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_set'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 79 | idio_16_set(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, offset, value);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~
> > | idio_16_gpio_set
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_set_multiple':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:87:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_set_multiple'; did you mean 'idio_16_gpio_set_multiple'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 87 | idio_16_set_multiple(idio16gpio->reg, &idio16gpio->state, mask, bits);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | idio_16_gpio_set_multiple
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_mask':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:106:45: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> > 106 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
> > | ^~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_unmask':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:129:41: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> > 129 | ioread8(&idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
> > | ^~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_handler':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:164:46: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> > 164 | irq_status = ioread8(&idio16gpio->reg->irq_status);
> > | ^~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:178:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> > 178 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->in0_7);
> > | ^~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_irq_init_hw':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:198:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> > 198 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->irq_ctl);
> > | ^~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:199:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> > 199 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->in0_7);
> > | ^~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_probe':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:232:37: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct idio_16'
> > 232 | iowrite8(0, &idio16gpio->reg->filter_ctl);
> > | ^~
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:248:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'idio_16_state_init'; did you mean 'file_ra_state_init'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > 248 | idio_16_state_init(&idio16gpio->state);
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > | file_ra_state_init
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c: In function 'idio_16_gpio_get':
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-pci-idio-16.c:63:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
> > 63 | }
> > | ^
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 473b79057bbd ("gpio: idio-16: Remove unused legacy interface")
> >
> > I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20230322 for today.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Stephen Rothwell
>
> Commit 473b79057bbd shouldn't be merged until all of the IDIO-16 legacy
> interface is first removed.
>
> Bart, would you revert all of the "Migrate IDIO-16 GPIO drivers to
> regmap API" patches [0]? That patchset needs to be revised anyway to
> prevent conflicts with the handle_mask_sync() API change [1]; I'll
> submit a v3 later this week that resolves the incompatibilies and
> rebase on the latest gpio/for-next.
>
> William Breathitt Gray
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1677515341.git.william.gray@linaro.org/
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1679323449.git.william.gray@linaro.org/
Done, thanks!
Bart
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
@ 2021-12-20 5:51 Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-20 12:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2021-12-20 5:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Andy Shevchenko, Matti Vaittinen, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 604 bytes --]
Hi all,
After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpio/gpio-rda.c: In function 'rda_gpio_probe':
drivers/gpio/gpio-rda.c:200:22: error: unused variable 'np' [-Werror=unused-variable]
200 | struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
| ^~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Caused by commit
448cf90513d9 ("gpio: Get rid of duplicate of_node assignment in the drivers")
I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20211217 (with the revert) for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-12-20 5:51 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2021-12-20 12:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Andy Shevchenko @ 2021-12-20 12:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, Andy Shevchenko, Matti Vaittinen,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 11:22 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpio/gpio-rda.c: In function 'rda_gpio_probe':
> drivers/gpio/gpio-rda.c:200:22: error: unused variable 'np' [-Werror=unused-variable]
> 200 | struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
> | ^~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 448cf90513d9 ("gpio: Get rid of duplicate of_node assignment in the drivers")
>
> I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20211217 (with the revert) for today.
My fault, sorry. Fix patch is on the way!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
@ 2021-12-13 20:31 broonie
2021-12-14 3:12 ` Florian Fainelli
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: broonie @ 2021-12-13 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Florian Fainelli, Xiang wangx, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List, linux-gpio
Hi all,
After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
/tmp/next/build/drivers/gpio/gpio-bcm-kona.c:508:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier]
508 | static const struct of_device_id const bcm_kona_gpio_of_match[] = {
| ^~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Caused by commit
19784a059cf47b ("gpio: bcm-kona: add const to of_device_id")
I used the tree from yesterday instead.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-12-13 20:31 broonie
@ 2021-12-14 3:12 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-12-17 6:17 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Florian Fainelli @ 2021-12-14 3:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: broonie, Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Xiang wangx, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List,
linux-gpio
On 12/13/2021 12:31 PM, broonie@kernel.org wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> /tmp/next/build/drivers/gpio/gpio-bcm-kona.c:508:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier]
> 508 | static const struct of_device_id const bcm_kona_gpio_of_match[] = {
> | ^~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 19784a059cf47b ("gpio: bcm-kona: add const to of_device_id")
>
> I used the tree from yesterday instead.
Doh! Should have double checked the code as the diff was not giving
enough context. This patch should simply be dropped, not even build
tested by Xiang it seems.
--
Florian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-12-14 3:12 ` Florian Fainelli
@ 2021-12-17 6:17 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-17 9:14 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2021-12-17 6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Florian Fainelli
Cc: broonie, Bartosz Golaszewski, Xiang wangx,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List, linux-gpio
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1044 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 19:12:05 -0800 Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/13/2021 12:31 PM, broonie@kernel.org wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > /tmp/next/build/drivers/gpio/gpio-bcm-kona.c:508:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier]
> > 508 | static const struct of_device_id const bcm_kona_gpio_of_match[] = {
> > | ^~~~~
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 19784a059cf47b ("gpio: bcm-kona: add const to of_device_id")
> >
> > I used the tree from yesterday instead.
>
> Doh! Should have double checked the code as the diff was not giving
> enough context. This patch should simply be dropped, not even build
> tested by Xiang it seems.
Today, I have reverted that commit. Please remove or revert it ASAP.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-12-17 6:17 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2021-12-17 9:14 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Bartosz Golaszewski @ 2021-12-17 9:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Florian Fainelli, Mark Brown, Xiang wangx,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List,
open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:17 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 19:12:05 -0800 Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/13/2021 12:31 PM, broonie@kernel.org wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > >
> > > /tmp/next/build/drivers/gpio/gpio-bcm-kona.c:508:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier]
> > > 508 | static const struct of_device_id const bcm_kona_gpio_of_match[] = {
> > > | ^~~~~
> > > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > >
> > > Caused by commit
> > >
> > > 19784a059cf47b ("gpio: bcm-kona: add const to of_device_id")
> > >
> > > I used the tree from yesterday instead.
> >
> > Doh! Should have double checked the code as the diff was not giving
> > enough context. This patch should simply be dropped, not even build
> > tested by Xiang it seems.
>
> Today, I have reverted that commit. Please remove or revert it ASAP.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
Done, sorry for the delay.
Bartosz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
@ 2021-11-15 23:51 Stephen Rothwell
2021-11-17 21:29 ` Rob Herring
2021-11-18 0:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2021-11-15 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Rob Herring, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 483 bytes --]
Hi all,
After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c:300:16: error: 'GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN' undeclared here (not in a function)
300 | { "BRCM9006", GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN },
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Caused by commit
ea708ac5bf41 ("gpio: xlp: Remove Netlogic XLP variants")
I have used the gpio-bgrl tree from next-20211115 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-11-15 23:51 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2021-11-17 21:29 ` Rob Herring
2021-11-18 0:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Rob Herring @ 2021-11-17 21:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 5:51 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c:300:16: error: 'GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN' undeclared here (not in a function)
> 300 | { "BRCM9006", GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN },
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Caused by commit
>
> ea708ac5bf41 ("gpio: xlp: Remove Netlogic XLP variants")
Here's the fix needed. Bartosz, let me know if you want a proper patch.
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c
index 814cc34aef97..c15ca977016c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c
@@ -297,8 +297,8 @@ static int xlp_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
static const struct acpi_device_id xlp_gpio_acpi_match[] = {
- { "BRCM9006", GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN },
- { "CAV9006", GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN },
+ { "BRCM9006" },
+ { "CAV9006" },
{},
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, xlp_gpio_acpi_match);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-11-15 23:51 Stephen Rothwell
2021-11-17 21:29 ` Rob Herring
@ 2021-11-18 0:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-11-23 2:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2021-11-18 0:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Rob Herring, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 632 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:51:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c:300:16: error: 'GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN' undeclared here (not in a function)
> 300 | { "BRCM9006", GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN },
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Caused by commit
>
> ea708ac5bf41 ("gpio: xlp: Remove Netlogic XLP variants")
>
> I have used the gpio-bgrl tree from next-20211115 for today.
I am still getting this failure :-(
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-11-18 0:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2021-11-23 2:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-02 3:16 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2021-11-23 2:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Rob Herring, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 773 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 11:29:51 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:51:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c:300:16: error: 'GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > 300 | { "BRCM9006", GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN },
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > ea708ac5bf41 ("gpio: xlp: Remove Netlogic XLP variants")
> >
> > I have used the gpio-bgrl tree from next-20211115 for today.
>
> I am still getting this failure :-(
And still :-( :-(
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
2021-11-23 2:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2021-12-02 3:16 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2021-12-02 3:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Rob Herring, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 930 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 13:04:18 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 11:29:51 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 10:51:12 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > >
> > > drivers/gpio/gpio-xlp.c:300:16: error: 'GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN' undeclared here (not in a function)
> > > 300 | { "BRCM9006", GPIO_VARIANT_VULCAN },
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >
> > > Caused by commit
> > >
> > > ea708ac5bf41 ("gpio: xlp: Remove Netlogic XLP variants")
> > >
> > > I have used the gpio-bgrl tree from next-20211115 for today.
> >
> > I am still getting this failure :-(
>
> And still :-( :-(
Its still failing ...
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree
@ 2021-02-18 6:54 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2021-02-18 6:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Maxim Kiselev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 668 bytes --]
Hi all,
After merging the gpio-brgl tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.c: In function 'pcf857x_probe':
drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.c:335:41: error: expected ';' before 'if'
335 | gpio->status = gpio->read(gpio->client)
| ^
| ;
......
338 | if (client->irq) {
| ~~
Caused by commit
ab94f4c529bc ("gpio: pcf857x: Fix missing first interrupt")
I have used the gpio-brgl tree from next-20210217 for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-26 19:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-10-13 4:14 linux-next: build failure after merge of the gpio-brgl tree Stephen Rothwell
2023-10-13 6:44 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-02-23 3:33 Stephen Rothwell
2024-02-23 7:51 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2024-02-23 12:29 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-02-25 1:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
2024-02-26 19:07 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2023-03-23 1:29 Stephen Rothwell
2023-03-22 19:50 ` William Breathitt Gray
2023-03-23 13:32 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-12-20 5:51 Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-20 12:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-12-13 20:31 broonie
2021-12-14 3:12 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-12-17 6:17 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-17 9:14 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2021-11-15 23:51 Stephen Rothwell
2021-11-17 21:29 ` Rob Herring
2021-11-18 0:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-11-23 2:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-12-02 3:16 ` Stephen Rothwell
2021-02-18 6:54 Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).