[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <35f0dd7e-f4c1-4042-bc85-19d277f4b1f9@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2025 14:02:38 -0500
From: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Samuel Zhang <guoqing.zhang@....com>, amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 11
[drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.ko]
On 7/12/25 3:11 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 11:25 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/11/25 2:10 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Changes since 20250710:
>>>
>>
>> on x86_64, when
>> # CONFIG_SUSPEND is not set
>> # CONFIG_HIBERNATION is not set
>> # CONFIG_PM is not set
>>
>> ERROR: modpost: "pm_hibernate_is_recovering" [drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.ko] undefined!
>>
>> caused by commit
>> 530694f54dd5e ("drm/amdgpu: do not resume device in thaw for normal hibernation")
>>
>> Rafael, is a stub appropriate for this case?
>
> pm_hibernate_is_recovering() is not supposed to be called by code that
> does not depend on CONFIG_HIBERNATE_CALLBACKS, but a stub returning
> false would work for this.
Thanks, I just sent out a fix for this.
>
> Mario, it would be good to fix this up in your tree. Also, it would
> be good to expose stuff to 0-day build testing before letting it go
> into linux-next. I use the bleeding-edge branch for this purpose.
>
Honestly; I'm surprised that 0-day didn't raise this on either dri-devel
or amd-gfx. I had expected at least one of those lists to raise this
over the last week of patches.
Anyone know the history why neither has 0-day?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists