Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-8934-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 19:34:57 +0100
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>, Sean Young <sean@mess.org>,
	Flavio Suligoi <f.suligoi@asem.it>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: (subset) linux-next: build failure after merge of the pwm tree
Message-ID: <ZYSFUZf8NcK5vvLv@orome.fritz.box>
References: <20231221165805.0c4771c1@canb.auug.org.au>
 <170316329164.542553.8341559295114557258.b4-ty@kernel.org>
 <20231221125801.GG10102@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EDqCKJEpkPSV1hLC"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231221125801.GG10102@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09)


--EDqCKJEpkPSV1hLC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 12:58:01PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
>=20
> > On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 16:58:05 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > After merging the backlight tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > >=20
> > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c: In function 'mp3309c_bl_update_sta=
tus':
> > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c:134:23: error: implicit declaration=
 of function 'pwm_apply_state'; did you mean 'pwm_apply_args'? [-Werror=3Di=
mplicit-function-declaration]
> > >   134 |                 ret =3D pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate=
);
> > >       |                       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >       |                       pwm_apply_args
> > >=20
> > > [...]
> >=20
> > Applied, thanks!
> >=20
> > [1/1] linux-next: build failure after merge of the pwm tree
> >       commit: f7baa9ccef93ba1c36a8ecf58c2f4e86fb3181b9
>=20
> Actually it's:
>=20
>   f7baa9ccef93b ("backlight: mp3309c: Rename  pwm_apply_state() to pwm_ap=
ply_might_sleep()")
>=20
> But don't bank on the commit ID staying the same.

This is likely going to break the build on your branch because
pwm_apply_might_sleep() is only available in the PWM tree right now. In
any case, I've now pushed a commit that adds pwm_apply_state() back as a
compatibility stub, so it should be okay for you to drop this if you
run into problems. It's always possible that somebody else wants to add
a new caller of pwm_apply_state() and in retrospect we should've
probably done this from the start, at least as a transitional measure
for one or two cycles.

Thierry

--EDqCKJEpkPSV1hLC
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEiOrDCAFJzPfAjcif3SOs138+s6EFAmWEhU8ACgkQ3SOs138+
s6HaAA/+IJB2HvxpmeREwYbIr+AxbGWibBE0j7MyukgIsTB3WBz1j8beoPip2x4g
WC9oPB2zyPr+iYvRO+OIVe0S0VcDk84Ue+/c9GjOnWcJIdn62uKnTA0FCPtC0cwq
X8ppXLEuQhFdXDafhpXq+UNIlJJcR5daZdg/vb1mnKEei3yPAJjiP9CdqxYZLePG
8I7qqqTuUKlOBUWVOBxBAnohAFPJCte0NagRNfikDrPSAkF0SbnDMpkza3F/xAQm
mEgnmJenShreiHYafaOQZfA6jozSQJ5AqdENzqYpgJObEYh1n+GuVCsiJYN2in68
dj2/m/Z6Oqk7206Tasle07Es741pAHKmxUrGM5V8EKF2LkKu0F/pnq5MheSFpwIC
QzOAWOdASjtzV0tEvG1UksonrWcVL0b/E6YuQBU2i8LS679LUnUTwtSMLY4gOXEk
2PA60ELOxUGNLUKrtohfDDnvXQ549MI+37I4f2+iIAUBa1qouNCxQQ6xN+2RtYBk
GIoNw+bQCBNcKkTjeNfmKQQ5h6oO5FZfWRbolgaVnx+VP1Ndz4rnkipFwUjzaEWL
lWe+PvmrDiw1Xrk5oBh6YsByX09DXk4sUKLJvttV8f9d2nKAmJD5pifuciVgd9yZ
2dBO9agHzWAJp7WB8MTdlrhy4XJUaZ6uQNPE12NAeYjtYeAphZ8=
=zYOM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--EDqCKJEpkPSV1hLC--