[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29ef57a1-e4dd-4d5d-8726-f1f79c698b66@roeck-us.net>
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:49:21 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
'Arnd Bergmann' <arnd@...nel.org>,
"'linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
'Jens Axboe' <axboe@...nel.dk>,
'Matthew Wilcox' <willy@...radead.org>,
'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@...radead.org>,
'Andrew Morton' <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
'Andy Shevchenko' <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
'Dan Carpenter' <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
"'Jason A . Donenfeld'" <Jason@...c4.com>,
"'pedro.falcato@...il.com'" <pedro.falcato@...il.com>,
'Mateusz Guzik' <mjguzik@...il.com>,
"'linux-mm@...ck.org'" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
'Lorenzo Stoakes' <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Buiild error in i915/xe (was: [PATCH next 4/7] minmax.h: Use
BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG() for the lo < hi test in clamp())
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 05:09:59PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 08:13:06 -0800
> Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 07:13:31PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > Use BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(statically_true(ulo > uhi), ...) for the sanity
> > > check of the bounds in clamp().
> > > Gives better error coverage and one less expansion of the arguments.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight@...lab.com>
> >
> > This patch triggers a build error when trying to build parisc:allmodconfig.
> > See error message and bisect log below.
> >
> > I don't think there is anything wrong with the patch. The underlying
> > problem seems to be that parisc:allmodconfig enables CONFIG_DRM_XE which
> > tries to build the affected file even though CONFIG_DRM_I915 is not
> > enabled/supported on parisc.
>
> This has appeared before.
> Any idea which inlined copy of scale() is causing the problem.
> On the face of it they all look ok.
>
> If you can reproduce it maybe try commenting out some of the calls.
>
See diff below. All three changes are needed.
No idea why the compiler would know that the values are invalid.
Guenter
---
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c
index fc1e517e074a..3b2c8bdfcf8d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c
@@ -76,10 +76,14 @@ static u32 clamp_user_to_hw(struct intel_connector *connector,
static u32 scale_hw_to_user(struct intel_connector *connector,
u32 hw_level, u32 user_max)
{
+#if 0
struct intel_panel *panel = &connector->panel;
return scale(hw_level, panel->backlight.min, panel->backlight.max,
0, user_max);
+#else
+ return 0;
+#endif
}
u32 intel_backlight_invert_pwm_level(struct intel_connector *connector, u32 val)
@@ -119,8 +123,10 @@ u32 intel_backlight_level_to_pwm(struct intel_connector *connector, u32 val)
drm_WARN_ON_ONCE(&i915->drm,
panel->backlight.max == 0 || panel->backlight.pwm_level_max == 0);
+#if 0
val = scale(val, panel->backlight.min, panel->backlight.max,
panel->backlight.pwm_level_min, panel->backlight.pwm_level_max);
+#endif
return intel_backlight_invert_pwm_level(connector, val);
}
@@ -138,8 +144,12 @@ u32 intel_backlight_level_from_pwm(struct intel_connector *connector, u32 val)
intel_has_quirk(display, QUIRK_INVERT_BRIGHTNESS)))
val = panel->backlight.pwm_level_max - (val - panel->backlight.pwm_level_min);
+#if 0
return scale(val, panel->backlight.pwm_level_min, panel->backlight.pwm_level_max,
panel->backlight.min, panel->backlight.max);
+#else
+ return 0;
+#endif
}
static u32 lpt_get_backlight(struct intel_connector *connector, enum pipe unused)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists