Op 2021-02-10 om 04:11 schreef Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/v3d/v3d_sched.c:263:1: error: return type is an incomplete
> type
> 263 | v3d_gpu_reset_for_timeout(struct
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/v3d/v3d_sched.c:263:1: error: return type is an incomplete type
263 | v3d_gpu_reset_for_timeout(struct v3d_dev *v3d, struct drm_sched_job
*sched_job)
|
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/v3d/v3d_sched.c:263:1: error: return type is an incomplete type
263 | v3d_gpu_reset_for_timeout(struct v3d_dev *v3d, struct drm_sched_job
*sched_job)
|
Hi
Am 14.01.21 um 01:31 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_cache.c: In function 'drm_need_swiotlb':
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_cache.c:202:6: error: implicit declaration of
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_cache.c: In function 'drm_need_swiotlb':
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_cache.c:202:6: error: implicit declaration of function
'mem_encrypt_active'
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 05:10:15PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 05:19:06 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 12:43:27PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build
Hi Michael,
On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 05:19:06 -0500 "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 12:43:27PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > In file included from
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem.c:1014:10: error: initialization of 'int (*)(struct
drm_gem_object *, struct dma_buf_map *)' from incompatible pointer type 'void *
(*)(struct drm_gem_object
On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:27:11AM +, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:28:34AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > --- a/include/linux/swiotlb.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/swiotlb.h
> > > @@ -5,6 +5,9 @@
> > > #include
> > > #include
> > > #include
> > > +#ifndef
On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 11:23 AM Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:28:34AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 2:43 AM Stephen Rothwell
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > >
On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:28:34AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > --- a/include/linux/swiotlb.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/swiotlb.h
> > @@ -5,6 +5,9 @@
> > #include
> > #include
> > #include
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_SWIOTLB
> > +#include
> > +#endif
No conditional includes please. And the
On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:28:34AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 2:43 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > In file included from
On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 12:43:27PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c:26:
> include/linux/swiotlb.h: In function
On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 2:43 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c:26:
> include/linux/swiotlb.h: In function
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c:26:
include/linux/swiotlb.h: In function 'swiotlb_max_mapping_size':
include/linux/swiotlb.h:99:9: error: 'SIZE_MAX' undeclared
Am 30.10.20 um 01:07 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c: In function 'nouveau_ttm_init':
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c:320:19: error: implicit
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c: In function 'nouveau_ttm_init':
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ttm.c:320:19: error: implicit declaration of
function 'swiotlb_nr_tbl'
Hi Stephen,
Le lun. 12 oct. 2020 à 15:24, Stephen Rothwell
a écrit :
Hi all,
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 15:42:02 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:09:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig)
Hi Stephen,
Le lun. 12 oct. 2020 à 15:24, Stephen Rothwell
a écrit :
Hi all,
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 15:42:02 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:09:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig)
Hi all,
[Just adding Dave to cc's]
On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 15:24:52 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 15:42:02 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:09:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the drm-misc tree,
Hi all,
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 15:42:02 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:09:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from include/linux/clk.h:13,
Hi all,
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 14:09:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
In file included from include/linux/clk.h:13,
from drivers/gpu/drm/ingenic/ingenic-drm-drv.c:10:
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
I noticed that the ingenic driver revert I had been waiting for appeared
in hte drm-misc tree, so I removed the BROKEN dependency for it, but it
produced the above errors, so I have marked
Hi all,
On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 10:55:47 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c: In function
> 'qxl_display_read_client_monitors_config':
>
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_display.c: In function
'qxl_display_read_client_monitors_config':
include/drm/drm_modeset_lock.h:167:7: error: implicit declaration of function
Hi Dave,
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:47:49 +1000 Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> My bad, my local builds passed, as I had made the change but forgot
> the commit --amend
>
> Pushed out a new head with it in it now.
Excellent, thanks.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgpwhIJQqFVu5.pgp
Description: OpenPGP
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 11:36, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 10:59:29 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> >
Hi all,
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 10:59:29 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm.c: In function
> 'amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm_free_memory_of_gpu':
>
Hi Stephen,
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 at 08:03, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 08:33:24 +0200 Thomas Zimmermann
> wrote:
> >
> > We recently dropped the _unlock() suffix from drm_gem_object_put(). This
> > patch should be ok.
>
> Yes, but what it shows is that the
Hi Thomas,
On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 08:33:24 +0200 Thomas Zimmermann
wrote:
>
> We recently dropped the _unlock() suffix from drm_gem_object_put(). This
> patch should be ok.
Yes, but what it shows is that the drm-misc tree is still based on
v5.7-rc1 and v5.8-rc1 has about 16000 more commits for
Hi
Am 17.06.20 um 02:59 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm.c: In function
> 'amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm_free_memory_of_gpu':
>
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm.c: In function
'amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm_free_memory_of_gpu':
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm.c:1357:2: error: implicit
declaration
On 4/29/20 10:09 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On 4/29/20 12:33 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:01:18 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>>> allyesconfig)
Hi Stephen,
On 4/29/20 12:33 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:01:18 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> drivers/video/fbdev/controlfb.c: In function
Hi all,
On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:01:18 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/video/fbdev/controlfb.c: In function 'controlfb_mmap':
> drivers/video/fbdev/controlfb.c:756:23: error:
Applied. Thanks!
Alex
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 8:22 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_tmz.c:23:10: fatal error: drm/drmP.h: No
> such file or
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_object.c:31:67: error: expected ')' before 'int'
module_param_named(virglhack, virtio_gpu_virglrenderer_workaround, int, 0400);
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 01:55:03PM +0800, Qiang Yu wrote:
> Thanks, patch is:
> Reviewed-by: Qiang Yu
This looks like a fairly naive conversion from the old IDR API to the
XArray API. You should be able to remove mgr->lock entirely, relying on
the xa_lock for synchronising free and get. If you
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:57 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 01:55:03PM +0800, Qiang Yu wrote:
> > Thanks, patch is:
> > Reviewed-by: Qiang Yu
>
> Good time to get started with committing patches? In general it's kinda
> confusing if the maintainer r-bs a patch, but doesn't
Hi Daniel/Stephen
Thanks for the report and the hints how to move forward to fix it.
> Sam, can you pls take a look at what komeda needs? you need to
> manually merge together drm-misc-next and drm-next first I think.
Merged the two tree and fixed build.
Undid the merge and checked that the
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 2:38 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_drv.c:13:
>
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_drv.c:13:
drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_kms.h:87:20: error: field 'base' has
incomplete type
struct drm_device
Hi Daniel,
On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 09:37:22 +0100 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
>
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm-tip/tree/fixups/drm-misc-next.patch?h=rerere-cache
>
> is the fixup you want. Should get baked into drm-next any moment, since
> the first drm-misc-next pull is already out.
I added that
On 1/8/19 3:37 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 11:12:41AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c: In
On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 11:12:41AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c: In function
> 'amdgpu_dm_mode_config_init':
>
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c: In function
'amdgpu_dm_mode_config_init':
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c:1695:30: error:
passing
Hi Stephen,
yeah, that is a known problem. I missed the change during rebase of the
revert.
Please see patch "2312f9842854 drm/v3d: fix broken build" which is
already in drm-misc-next and fixes the issue.
Christian.
Am 06.12.18 um 03:32 schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging
Hi Rodrigo,
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 17:21:54 -0800 Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>
> I had just written the email for you about this.
> Feel free to ignore that one since you already found the solution
> and sorry for the delay on warning you.
And I should read all my email before
Hi Rodrigo,
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 17:21:54 -0800 Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>
> I had just written the email for you about this.
> Feel free to ignore that one since you already found the solution
> and sorry for the delay on warning you.
And I should read all my email before responding to earlier ones
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 01:00:15AM +, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Stephen,
I had just written the email for you about this.
Feel free to ignore that one since you already found the solution
and sorry for the delay on warning you.
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 01:00:15AM +, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Stephen,
I had just written the email for you about this.
Feel free to ignore that one since you already found the solution
and sorry for the delay on warning you.
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c: In function 'intel_dsi_get_panel_orientation':
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c:1673:13: error: storage size of 'plane' isn't
known
enum plane plane;
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c: In function 'intel_dsi_get_panel_orientation':
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi.c:1673:13: error: storage size of 'plane' isn't
known
enum plane plane;
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 10:24:41AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> How are we going to handle
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 10:24:41AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
> >>
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter
> wrote:
>>
>> How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
>> drm-misc, I guess you could
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter
> wrote:
>>
>> How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
>> drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But
>> that'll
Hi Daniel,
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
> drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But
> that'll probably lead to more conflicts because git
Hi Daniel,
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
> drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But
> that'll probably lead to more conflicts because git will get confused.
I'll
Hi,
On 21-07-17 09:24, Daniel Vetter wrote:
Hi Greg,
How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But
that'll probably lead to more conflicts because git will get confused.
Or you could just delete
Hi,
On 21-07-17 09:24, Daniel Vetter wrote:
Hi Greg,
How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But
that'll probably lead to more conflicts because git will get confused.
Or you could just delete
Hi Greg,
How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But
that'll probably lead to more conflicts because git will get confused.
Or you could just delete the set_busid hook in -staging, which renders
the
Hi Greg,
How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in
drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But
that'll probably lead to more conflicts because git will get confused.
Or you could just delete the set_busid hook in -staging, which renders
the
Hi Dave,
The following is now applicable to the drm and staging.current trees ...
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:46:57 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
>
Hi Dave,
The following is now applicable to the drm and staging.current trees ...
On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 11:46:57 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vbox_drv.c:235:2:
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vbox_drv.c:235:2: error: unknown field 'set_busid'
specified in initializer
.set_busid = drm_pci_set_busid,
^
drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vbox_drv.c:235:15:
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vbox_drv.c:235:2: error: unknown field 'set_busid'
specified in initializer
.set_busid = drm_pci_set_busid,
^
drivers/staging/vboxvideo/vbox_drv.c:235:15:
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
Caused by commit
b6dcaaac4474 ("drm/vblank: _ioctl posfix for ioctl handler")
interacting with commit
d5288c88c67c ("switch compat_drm_wait_vblank() to drm_ioctl_kernel()")
from
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
Caused by commit
b6dcaaac4474 ("drm/vblank: _ioctl posfix for ioctl handler")
interacting with commit
d5288c88c67c ("switch compat_drm_wait_vblank() to drm_ioctl_kernel()")
from
Hi all,
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
> initializer
>
Hi all,
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
> initializer
> .kmap_atomic =
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> On Tue, 2 May 2017 10:25:18 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>
>>> Since this is an all-new driver it might
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> On Tue, 2 May 2017 10:25:18 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>
>>> Since this is an all-new driver it might be best to stagger the pull
>>> requests and merge the
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Tue, 2 May 2017 10:25:18 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>
>> Since this is an all-new driver it might be best to stagger the pull
>> requests and merge the new tee subsystem (or
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Tue, 2 May 2017 10:25:18 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>
>> Since this is an all-new driver it might be best to stagger the pull
>> requests and merge the new tee subsystem (or whatever it is) after drm?
>>
>> Not sure
Hi Daniel,
On Tue, 2 May 2017 10:25:18 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> Since this is an all-new driver it might be best to stagger the pull
> requests and merge the new tee subsystem (or whatever it is) after drm?
>
> Not sure what to best do here ...
This will merge via Dave,
Hi Daniel,
On Tue, 2 May 2017 10:25:18 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> Since this is an all-new driver it might be best to stagger the pull
> requests and merge the new tee subsystem (or whatever it is) after drm?
>
> Not sure what to best do here ...
This will merge via Dave, so Dave just
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:25:12AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> >
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:25:12AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error:
Hi all,
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
> initializer
>
Hi all,
On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:10:14 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
> initializer
> .kmap_atomic =
Thanks Stephen. Looks good to me.
Logan
On 20/04/17 08:10 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
> initializer
Thanks Stephen. Looks good to me.
Logan
On 20/04/17 08:10 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
> initializer
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
initializer
.kmap_atomic = tee_shm_op_kmap_atomic,
^
drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:17: error: initialization from
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:2: error: unknown field 'kmap_atomic' specified in
initializer
.kmap_atomic = tee_shm_op_kmap_atomic,
^
drivers/tee/tee_shm.c:87:17: error: initialization from
Thanks for this. This and "drm/vmwgfx: merge fixup for set_config API change":
Reviewed-by: Sinclair Yeh
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 01:31:29PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed
Thanks for this. This and "drm/vmwgfx: merge fixup for set_config API change":
Reviewed-by: Sinclair Yeh
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 01:31:29PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
>
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn.c: In function 'vmw_sou_crtc_page_flip':
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn.c:327:8: error: too few arguments to
function 'drm_atomic_helper_page_flip'
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn.c: In function 'vmw_sou_crtc_page_flip':
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn.c:327:8: error: too few arguments to
function 'drm_atomic_helper_page_flip'
Hi Jani,
On Thu, 05 Jan 2017 12:24:13 +0200 Jani Nikula
wrote:
>
> Daniel reverted it in drm-misc.
OK, thanks.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Hi Jani,
On Thu, 05 Jan 2017 12:24:13 +0200 Jani Nikula
wrote:
>
> Daniel reverted it in drm-misc.
OK, thanks.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Thu, 05 Jan 2017, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/usb/Kconfig:39:error: recursive dependency detected!
> drivers/usb/Kconfig:39: symbol USB is
On Thu, 05 Jan 2017, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/usb/Kconfig:39:error: recursive dependency detected!
> drivers/usb/Kconfig:39: symbol USB is selected by MOUSE_APPLETOUCH
>
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/usb/Kconfig:39:error: recursive dependency detected!
drivers/usb/Kconfig:39: symbol USB is selected by MOUSE_APPLETOUCH
drivers/input/mouse/Kconfig:187:symbol
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/usb/Kconfig:39:error: recursive dependency detected!
drivers/usb/Kconfig:39: symbol USB is selected by MOUSE_APPLETOUCH
drivers/input/mouse/Kconfig:187:symbol
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
ERROR: "depot_save_stack" [drivers/gpu/drm/drm.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "depot_fetch_stack" [drivers/gpu/drm/drm.ko] undefined!
Caused by commit
5705670d0463 ("drm: Track drm_mm allocators
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
ERROR: "depot_save_stack" [drivers/gpu/drm/drm.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "depot_fetch_stack" [drivers/gpu/drm/drm.ko] undefined!
Caused by commit
5705670d0463 ("drm: Track drm_mm allocators
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h:32:0,
from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c:36:
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c: In function
Hi all,
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h:32:0,
from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c:36:
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c: In function
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 02:17:41PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 09:41:38AM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:24:51PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> >
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo