Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the pwm tree

From: Sean Young <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:13:05 +0000

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:09:50AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2023, Thierry Reding wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 04:58:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > After merging the backlight tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > > 
> > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c: In function 'mp3309c_bl_update_status':
> > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c:134:23: error: implicit declaration of function 'pwm_apply_state'; did you mean 'pwm_apply_args'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > >   134 |                 ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
> > >       |                       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >       |                       pwm_apply_args
> > > 
> > > Caused by commit
> > > 
> > >   c748a6d77c06 ("pwm: Rename pwm_apply_state() to pwm_apply_might_sleep()")
> > > 
> > > interacting with commit
> > > 
> > >   2e914516a58c ("backlight: mp3309c: Add support for MPS MP3309C")
> > > 
> > > from the backlight tree.
> > > 
> > > I have appplied the following merge fix patch.
> > > 
> > > From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
> > > Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 16:13:37 +1100
> > > Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "backlight: mp3309c: Add support for MPS MP3309C"
> > > 
> > > from the backlight tree interacting with commit
> > > 
> > >   c748a6d77c06 ("pwm: Rename pwm_apply_state() to pwm_apply_might_sleep()")
> > > 
> > > from the pwm tree.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c | 4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c b/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c
> > > index 34d71259fac1..b0d9aef6942b 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c
> > > @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static int mp3309c_bl_update_status(struct backlight_device *bl)
> > >  					    chip->pdata->levels[brightness],
> > >  					    chip->pdata->levels[chip->pdata->max_brightness]);
> > >  		pwmstate.enabled = true;
> > > -		ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
> > > +		ret = pwm_apply_might_sleep(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
> > >  		if (ret)
> > >  			return ret;
> > >  
> > > @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ static int mp3309c_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> > >  					    chip->pdata->default_brightness,
> > >  					    chip->pdata->max_brightness);
> > >  		pwmstate.enabled = true;
> > > -		ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
> > > +		ret = pwm_apply_might_sleep(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate);
> > >  		if (ret)
> > >  			return dev_err_probe(chip->dev, ret,
> > >  					     "error setting pwm device\n");
> > 
> > Hi Lee,
> > 
> > We could exchange stable tags to make this work, but given that people
> > (myself included) are getting into holiday mode I'm inclined to just add
> > a pwm_apply_state() compatibility inline for now and then we can address
> > this in the new year or for the next cycle. What do you think?
> 
> Sorry, why is this happening?
> 
> I still see support for pwm_apply_state() in -next.

Not any more:

$ git grep pwm_apply_state linux-next/master 
$ 

Sean