[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200818062915.GT2639@vkoul-mobl>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:59:15 +0530
From: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, tiwai@...e.de,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com, hui.wang@...onical.com,
broonie@...nel.org, srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
jank@...ence.com, mengdong.lin@...el.com,
slawomir.blauciak@...el.com, sanyog.r.kale@...el.com,
rander.wang@...ux.intel.com, bard.liao@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] soundwire: intel: add power management support
On 17-08-20, 11:10, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
>
> > > I had applied except 3 & 9 (few skipped in middle due to conflict while
> > > applying), BUT I get a build failure on patch 2 onwards :(
> > >
> > > drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c: In function ‘sdw_intel_cleanup’:
> > > drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c:72:4: error: implicit declaration of
> > > function ‘pm_runtime_disable’
> > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > 72 | pm_runtime_disable(&link->pdev->dev);
> > >
> > > I suspect due to missing header? I was on x64 build with allmodconfig
> > >
> > > So only patch 1 is applied and pushed now
> >
> > I just tried on these series applied on top of soundwire/next
> >
> > commit 9b3b4b3f2f2af863d2f6dd65afd295a5a673afa2 (soundwire/next)
> >
> > soundwire: intel: Add basic power management support
> >
> > And I don't see any issue?
>
> Sorry, I misunderstood the issue. Yes indeed the #include
> <linux/pm_runtime.h> is added to the wrong patch, I see Bard fixed this in
> our tree. Not sure what happened here, I ran a patch-by-patch compilation
> test a long time ago and kbuild was silent. Thanks for spotting this.
>
> > If you want to double-check merge issues, I pushed the code here:
> > https://github.com/plbossart/sound/tree/sdw/pm_runtime_soundwire_next
> >
> > I am really not sure what conflicts you are referring to, git am worked
> > fine for me, only skipped the first patch that's already applied.
>
> But the point about conflicts does remain, I am not sure why you skipped
> patches, I have no merge conflicts on my side.
As noted above, I tried to apply except 3 & 9 due to questions on them.
It is quite normal that dependencies fail to apply, not sure why you are
confused.
--
~Vinod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists