linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-fixes tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250922182832.GA1542561@ax162>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 11:28:32 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>,
	Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>,
	DRM XE List <intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@...el.com>,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
	Zongyao Bai <zongyao.bai@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-fixes
 tree

Hi Mark,

On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 01:45:19PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   ff89a4d285c82 ("drm/xe/sysfs: Add cleanup action in xe_device_sysfs_init")
> 
> from the drm-fixes tree and commit:
> 
>   fb3c27a69c473 ("drm/xe/sysfs: Simplify sysfs registration")
> 
> from the drm-xe tree.
> 
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
> 
> diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c
> index b7f8fcfed8d86,c5151c86a98ae..0000000000000
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c
> @@@ -308,19 -290,15 +290,15 @@@ int xe_device_sysfs_init(struct xe_devi
>   			return ret;
>   	}
>   
> - 	if (xe->info.platform == XE_BATTLEMAGE) {
> - 		ret = sysfs_create_files(&dev->kobj, auto_link_downgrade_attrs);
> + 	if (xe->info.platform == XE_BATTLEMAGE && !IS_SRIOV_VF(xe)) {
> + 		ret = devm_device_add_group(dev, &auto_link_downgrade_attr_group);
>   		if (ret)
>  -			return ret;
>  +			goto cleanup;
>   
> - 		ret = late_bind_create_files(dev);
> + 		ret = devm_device_add_group(dev, &late_bind_attr_group);
>   		if (ret)
>  -			return ret;
>  +			goto cleanup;
>   	}
>   
> - 	return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, xe_device_sysfs_fini, xe);
> - 
> - cleanup:
> - 	xe_device_sysfs_fini(xe);
> - 	return ret;
> + 	return 0;
>   }

This resolution breaks the build.

  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c: In function 'xe_device_sysfs_init':
  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_sysfs.c:300:25: error: label 'cleanup' used but not defined
    300 |                         goto cleanup;
        |                         ^~~~

I think those should just be 'return ret', as it appears that
fb3c27a69c473 already includes ff89a4d285c82, so I think you can just
take the right side of the conflict wholesale.

Cheers,
Nathan