[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <33a65b94-9e99-2cf8-0b62-95127916ce79@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 10:52:34 +0100
From: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Rex-BC Chen <rex-bc.chen@...iatek.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the arm-soc tree
Hi Arnd,
On 02/03/2022 08:45, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 11:50 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the arm-soc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
>> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c:64:10: error: 'const struct mtk_mmsys_driver_data' has no member named 'sw0_rst_offset'
>> 64 | .sw0_rst_offset = MT8186_MMSYS_SW0_RST_B,
>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> In file included from drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c:18:
>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8186-mmsys.h:55:57: warning: excess elements in struct initializer
>> 55 | #define MT8186_MMSYS_SW0_RST_B 0x160
>> | ^~~~~
>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c:64:27: note: in expansion of macro 'MT8186_MMSYS_SW0_RST_B'
>> 64 | .sw0_rst_offset = MT8186_MMSYS_SW0_RST_B,
>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mt8186-mmsys.h:55:57: note: (near initialization for 'mt8186_mmsys_driver_data')
>> 55 | #define MT8186_MMSYS_SW0_RST_B 0x160
>> | ^~~~~
>> drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c:64:27: note: in expansion of macro 'MT8186_MMSYS_SW0_RST_B'
>> 64 | .sw0_rst_offset = MT8186_MMSYS_SW0_RST_B,
>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> Caused by commit
>>
>> 831785f0e5b9 ("soc: mediatek: mmsys: add mmsys reset control for MT8186")
>>
>> I have used the arm-soc tree from next-20220301 for today.
>
> I'm going on vacation right now, did a quick revert of that commit to fix the
> build. Rex-BC Chen, Matthias: please send a proper fix that I can apply next
> week when I get back, to replace my revert.
>
I send a new pull request with the missing commit included. Please let me know
if you prefer the commit on top of the old pull request. This would break
git-bisecting, but the window of commits is rather small.
I fixed my for-next branch yesterday already.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Matthias
Powered by blists - more mailing lists