Control: tag -1 + fixed-upstream patch

Hi,

On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:56:50 +0100 Andreas Beckmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> reform2-lpc-dkms fails to build a module for Linux 6.13 in experimental:

thank you for reporting this!

>   CC [M]  reform2_lpc.o
> reform2_lpc.c: In function 'lpc_probe':
> reform2_lpc.c:178:21: error: implicit declaration of function 
> 'power_supply_register_no_ws'; did you mean 'power_supply_register'? 
> [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]

I fixed this issue upstream:

--- a/lpc/reform2_lpc.c
+++ b/lpc/reform2_lpc.c
@@ -175,7 +175,12 @@ static int lpc_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
        psy_cfg.of_node = spi->dev.of_node;
        psy_cfg.drv_data = data;
 
+#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE >= KERNEL_VERSION(6,13,0)
+       psy_cfg.no_wakeup_source = true;
+       data->bat = power_supply_register(&spi->dev, &bat_desc, &psy_cfg);
+#else
        data->bat = power_supply_register_no_ws(&spi->dev, &bat_desc, &psy_cfg);
+#endif
        if (IS_ERR(data->bat)) {
                printk(KERN_ERR "%s: power_supply_register_no_ws failed\n",
                       __func__);

And backported that to the Debian packaging:
https://salsa.debian.org/reform-team/reform-tools/-/commit/d616d0b15c427a1324a443551f163ac6f640d8ce

> And while you are at it, please add to debian/reform2-lpc-dkms.dkms
> 
>     # struct spi_device changed API in v5.18
>     BUILD_EXCLUSIVE_KERNEL_MIN="5.18"
> 
> to document the minimal supported kernel version.
> There is no need to add support for ancient kernels.
> 
> The error observed up to Linux 5.17 is
> 
> /var/lib/dkms/reform2_lpc/1.66/build/reform2_lpc.c:539:15: error: 
> initialization of 'int (*)(struct spi_device *)' from incompatible pointer 
> type 'void (*)(struct spi_device *)' [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types]
>   539 |     .remove = lpc_remove,

Thank you, fixed here:

https://salsa.debian.org/reform-team/reform-tools/-/commit/cea31df9efa21494d85159f6a790de9f57a25d70

I'm surprised you are building dkms modules against such ancient
kernel versions but I'm grateful that you reported this issue!

Thanks!

cheers, josch

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply via email to