On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 06:23:59AM -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 11:10:26AM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 12:49:52PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> >> dg1_gt_workarounds_init() is only ever called for DG1, so there is no
> >> point checking it again.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c | 12 +++---------
> >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
> >> index 32aa1647721a..eb6cc4867d67 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_workarounds.c
> >> @@ -1472,21 +1472,15 @@ gen12_gt_workarounds_init(struct intel_gt *gt, struct i915_wa_list *wal)
> >> static void
> >> dg1_gt_workarounds_init(struct intel_gt *gt, struct i915_wa_list *wal)
> >> {
> >> - struct drm_i915_private *i915 = gt->i915;
> >> -
> >
> >Looks like you pushed some stale version of this patch which
> >didn't remove this variable. Now the CONFIG_DRM_I915_WERROR=y
> >build is broken.
> >
> >Did you lose that from your pre-push build .config?
>
> no, looks like a conflict between drm-intel-gt-next and drm-intel-next
>
> 69ea87e1591a ("drm/i915/dg1: Drop support for pre-production steppings")
> merged in drm-intel-next dropped the only user.
>
> This patch was merged in drm-intel-gt-next and I didn't realize the
> race was with the other branch rather than with the same branch due to
> taking a long time for me to apply. Let me rebuild drm-tip to fix it up.
I already fixed it. Just forgot to note that here.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
