From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7BC6C4320A for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 07:31:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD9866108F for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 07:31:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238744AbhHTHc3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 03:32:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51092 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238603AbhHTHc2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 03:32:28 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x630.google.com (mail-pl1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::630]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0A74C061575; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 00:31:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x630.google.com with SMTP id w6so5467517plg.9; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 00:31:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=n7E/a6EUqWsmgqTFrSSXMgfXwa+yrAx9MW1PuQlSZc0=; b=hsHfUDZ7uisqnEfdjRhkqSFqJNBswVU29sTPAsVyln3XIisuYlLf/BFI37XpH8XQFf TIULcFoZ0VFuGbN/+cwwtif8DxW/rcZjOHhUcQu/QfoenWyXCzx3KulZfqD5fTSByX+X w8TKF6lhyR2IsGLOUiVRIgOtAQ5Vw8ie+zEQ7xmuJoZ9ZaivFjIB5p/mD3PZum/C87zU QHXpZ1VQOL6xtF9wW9NhKyBnYnf2PHYLo3NJeVTZmIhEa+dXqt/qYno7kM112xErzs9n BqdEEenl9Q14r4SLCH5hUxJJa4MADrGA3SN2DqGW0lkGcaKbuyKXjZed/cCuNF1/5hXQ QYVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=n7E/a6EUqWsmgqTFrSSXMgfXwa+yrAx9MW1PuQlSZc0=; b=idTa7D4ICNpjPEaJpJewS+otcyFT8Q26PDwB4haFvg1+wr2RoD7N41WtbWDbf3HE28 zbRZWDOwQRSUZnrqdnzT4w9xs22oAHehFiJ1TBAA20b5Avq1COtI9hQpMyqBjvT+M24K d/hVv9BCywNOFmYPpACre/IfBiKSHRvYKM240FGRl+V/MQBDkHmUtd1IP0zK5wckH56a On6x+XPAxQ30gm3fV2z0bC4vo7lNizGsSaNhUplAWbn3nq/GkFC5AJ9xJADWCR7ZHUa+ 53LFRc12DIuleU43UpO5KhZxVUmMMNqPAK6L44QIWF+aYDhirpf55fY4h9A1IGM22Ihk VXIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ZNNvhMOJHXWQyxByDCA1iC0XENXWTZMY9/HXDklR7mVGapyst d1h6N2stfCQRtJPPc+2OlEav7LO8L0A5p9NAu5Y= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzJtwD2SYadVDuXC4QiKV1nLpYz39yXBfdNqqRFgmWacEITTYn4lpyPwcv1yUnmDIm7/+BY+JzHCUNf9VXRw8w= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:c89:: with SMTP id v9mr3298116pja.175.1629444710261; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 00:31:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210820150022.2160a348@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20210820150022.2160a348@canb.auug.org.au> From: M D Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 15:31:31 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the drivers-x86 tree To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Hans de Goede , Mark Gross , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 1:00 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > After merging the drivers-x86 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > allmodconfig) failed like this: > > drivers/platform/x86/ideapad-laptop.c: In function 'ideapad_wmi_notify': > drivers/platform/x86/ideapad-laptop.c:1469:3: error: a label can only be part of a statement and a declaration is not a statement > 1469 | unsigned long result; > | ^~~~~~~~ > > Caused by commit > > 18cfd76e7b84 ("ideapad-laptop: Fix Legion 5 Fn lock LED") > > I have used the drivers-x86 tree from next-20210819 for today. > > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell Hi Stephen, Thanks for your work! This error occurs because only a statement is allowed after a label, but a definition is not a statement in C99. This can be fixed by wrapping the case block with curly braces like this: case 208: { ... } However I don't know why my compiler did not report this error. I was using gcc 11.1.0 under Arch Linux. Regards, Meng Dong