Re: [PATCH v3 28/28] mfd: intel-lpss: Remove #ifdef guards for PM related functions

From: Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>
To: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 28/28] mfd: intel-lpss: Remove #ifdef guards for PM related functions
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 15:53:58 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y5KMKR.O7V1VJVC871X@crapouillou.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y1/tMMEVA5inNyw/@google.com>

Le lun. 31 oct. 2022 à 15:43:44 +0000, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> a 
écrit :
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2022, Paul Cercueil wrote:
> 
>>  Hi,
>> 
>>  Le lun. 31 oct. 2022 à 08:03:25 -0700, Nathan Chancellor 
>> <nathan@kernel.org>
>>  a écrit :
>>  > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 02:59:37PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
>>  > >  On Sun, 23 Oct 2022, kernel test robot wrote:
>>  > >
>>  > >  > Hi Paul,
>>  > >  >
>>  > >  > I love your patch! Yet something to improve:
>>  > >  >
>>  > >  > [auto build test ERROR on lee-mfd/for-mfd-next]
>>  > >  > [also build test ERROR on linus/master v6.1-rc1 
>> next-20221021]
>>  > >  > [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop 
>> us a
>>  > > note.
>>  > >  > And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as
>>  > > documented in
>>  > >  > 
>> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>>  > >  >
>>  > >  > url:    
>> https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Paul-Cercueil/mfd-Remove-ifdef-guards-for-PM-functions/20221023-175612
>>  > >  > base:
>>  > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/mfd.git
>>  > > for-mfd-next
>>  > >  > patch link:
>>  > > 
>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221023094852.8035-29-paul%40crapouillou.net
>>  > >  > patch subject: [PATCH v3 28/28] mfd: intel-lpss: Remove 
>> #ifdef
>>  > > guards for PM related functions
>>  > >  > config: i386-randconfig-a013
>>  > >  > compiler: clang version 14.0.6
>>  > > (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project
>>  > > f28c006a5895fc0e329fe15fead81e37457cb1d1)
>>  > >  > reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
>>  > >  >         wget
>>  > > 
>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross
>>  > > -O ~/bin/make.cross
>>  > >  >         chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
>>  > >  >         # 
>> https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commit/873891d1ee1634da028bb74d0e7cfa5d77b2f157
>>  > >  >         git remote add linux-review
>>  > > https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux
>>  > >  >         git fetch --no-tags linux-review
>>  > > 
>> Paul-Cercueil/mfd-Remove-ifdef-guards-for-PM-functions/20221023-175612
>>  > >  >         git checkout 873891d1ee1634da028bb74d0e7cfa5d77b2f157
>>  > >  >         # save the config file
>>  > >  >         mkdir build_dir && cp config build_dir/.config
>>  > >  >         COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang
>>  > > make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=i386 SHELL=/bin/bash 
>> drivers/mfd/
>>  > >  >
>>  > >  > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where 
>> applicable
>>  > >  > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>  > >  >
>>  > >  > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>>  > >  >
>>  > >  > >> drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-pci.c:75:8: error: type specifier
>>  > > missing, defaults to 'int' [-Werror,-Wimplicit-int]
>>  > >  >    static INTEL_LPSS_PM_OPS(intel_lpss_pci_pm_ops);
>>  > >  >    ~~~~~~ ^
>>  > >  > >> drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-pci.c:75:26: error: a parameter 
>> list
>>  > > without types is only allowed in a function definition
>>  > >  >    static INTEL_LPSS_PM_OPS(intel_lpss_pci_pm_ops);
>>  > >  >                             ^
>>  > >  >    2 errors generated.
>>  > >
>>  > >  Is this a valid error?
>>  >
>>  > Yes, because this change removes the definition of 
>> INTEL_LPSS_PM_OPS in
>>  > intel-lpss.h.
>> 
>>  The "static INTEL_LPSS_PM_OPS(intel_lpss_pci_pm_ops)" is dead code; 
>> just
>>  removing this line should be enough to make it work.
>> 
>>  I'll V2 when I find some time.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I'll put this set on hold for v2.

If you think the other patches are OK you can merge them, and I'll just 
send a V2 with this one patch.

Cheers,
-Paul