On Sat, 1 Mar 2025 at 15:32, kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Antheas, > > kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: > > [auto build test ERROR on groeck-staging/hwmon-next] > [also build test ERROR on sre-power-supply/for-next amd-pstate/linux-next amd-pstate/bleeding-edge rafael-pm/linux-next rafael-pm/bleeding-edge linus/master v6.14-rc4 next-20250228] > [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. > And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in > https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Antheas-Kapenekakis/hwmon-oxp-sensors-Distinguish-the-X1-variants/20250223-003148 > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/groeck/linux-staging.git hwmon-next > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250222161824.172511-12-lkml%40antheas.dev > patch subject: [PATCH v2 11/12] platform/x86: oxpec: Move hwmon/oxp-sensors to platform/x86 > config: x86_64-randconfig-078-20250301 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250301/202503012254.EtBZW7gW-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config) > compiler: clang version 19.1.7 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project cd708029e0b2869e80abe31ddb175f7c35361f90) > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250301/202503012254.EtBZW7gW-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/reproduce) > > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of > the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202503012254.EtBZW7gW-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ > > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): > > >> ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info > >>> referenced by oxpec.c:1051 (drivers/platform/x86/oxpec.c:1051) > >>> vmlinux.o:(oxp_platform_probe) > > -- > 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service > https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki Guess it doesn't merge anymore. I have two other nits I fixed so I was planning for a V2. Question for the charge_type ABI. Should we switch to charge_behaviour since that also allows for autodiscovery? Antheas
