[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251112092800.290282eb@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 09:28:00 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...gutronix.de, Gregor Herburger <gregor.herburger@...tq-group.com>,
Viken Dadhaniya <viken.dadhaniya@....qualcomm.com>, Manivannan Sadhasivam
<mani@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 07/11] can: mcp251xfd: add workaround for
errata 5
On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 10:13:47 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> +static int
> +mcp251xfd_regmap_nocrc_gather_write(void *context,
> + const void *reg_p, size_t reg_len,
> + const void *val, size_t val_len)
> +{
> + const u16 byte_exclude = MCP251XFD_REG_IOCON +
> + mcp251xfd_first_byte_set(MCP251XFD_REG_IOCON_GPIO_MASK);
Looks like this is added by the next patch :(
drivers/net/can/spi/mcp251xfd/mcp251xfd-regmap.c:48:59: error: ‘MCP251XFD_REG_IOCON_GPIO_MASK’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘MCP251XFD_REG_IOCON_GPIO0’?
48 | mcp251xfd_first_byte_set(MCP251XFD_REG_IOCON_GPIO_MASK);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| MCP251XFD_REG_IOCON_GPIO0
Do you do rebases or do we have to take it as is?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists