Hi "Nuno, I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve: [auto build test WARNING on dtor-input/next] [cannot apply to brgl/gpio/for-next hid/for-next linus/master v5.19-rc5 next-20220708] [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/Nuno-S/adp5588-keys-refactor-and-fw-properties-support/20220708-173730 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dtor/input.git next config: x86_64-allyesconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220709/202207090942.hoWXaKCu-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config) compiler: gcc-11 (Debian 11.3.0-3) 11.3.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): # https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commit/75ce2e5c9e3267912dc4bc6773869d135a753e35 git remote add linux-review https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux git fetch --no-tags linux-review Nuno-S/adp5588-keys-refactor-and-fw-properties-support/20220708-173730 git checkout 75ce2e5c9e3267912dc4bc6773869d135a753e35 # save the config file mkdir build_dir && cp config build_dir/.config make W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=x86_64 SHELL=/bin/bash drivers/input/keyboard/ If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where applicable Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): In file included from include/linux/device.h:15, from include/linux/gpio/driver.h:5, from drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:13: drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c: In function 'adp5588_fw_parse': >> drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:667:39: warning: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 4 has type 'long unsigned int' [-Wformat=] 667 | dev_err(&client->dev, "number of unlock keys(%d) > (%d)\n", | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/dev_printk.h:110:30: note: in definition of macro 'dev_printk_index_wrap' 110 | _p_func(dev, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ | ^~~ include/linux/dev_printk.h:144:56: note: in expansion of macro 'dev_fmt' 144 | dev_printk_index_wrap(_dev_err, KERN_ERR, dev, dev_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__) | ^~~~~~~ drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:667:17: note: in expansion of macro 'dev_err' 667 | dev_err(&client->dev, "number of unlock keys(%d) > (%d)\n", | ^~~~~~~ drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c:667:70: note: format string is defined here 667 | dev_err(&client->dev, "number of unlock keys(%d) > (%d)\n", | ~^ | | | int | %ld vim +667 drivers/input/keyboard/adp5588-keys.c 631 632 static int adp5588_fw_parse(struct adp5588_kpad *kpad) 633 { 634 struct i2c_client *client = kpad->client; 635 int ret, i; 636 637 ret = matrix_keypad_parse_properties(&client->dev, &kpad->rows, 638 &kpad->cols); 639 if (ret) 640 return ret; 641 642 if (kpad->rows > ADP5588_ROWS_MAX || kpad->cols > ADP5588_COLS_MAX) { 643 dev_err(&client->dev, "Invalid nr of rows(%u) or cols(%u)\n", 644 kpad->rows, kpad->cols); 645 return -EINVAL; 646 } 647 648 ret = matrix_keypad_build_keymap(NULL, NULL, kpad->rows, kpad->cols, 649 kpad->keycode, kpad->input); 650 if (ret) 651 return ret; 652 653 kpad->row_shift = get_count_order(kpad->cols); 654 655 if (device_property_read_bool(&client->dev, "autorepeat")) 656 __set_bit(EV_REP, kpad->input->evbit); 657 658 kpad->nkeys_unlock = device_property_count_u32(&client->dev, 659 "adi,unlock-keys"); 660 if (kpad->nkeys_unlock <= 0) { 661 /* so that we don't end up enabling key lock */ 662 kpad->nkeys_unlock = 0; 663 return 0; 664 } 665 666 if (kpad->nkeys_unlock > ARRAY_SIZE(kpad->unlock_keys)) { > 667 dev_err(&client->dev, "number of unlock keys(%d) > (%d)\n", 668 kpad->nkeys_unlock, ARRAY_SIZE(kpad->unlock_keys)); 669 return -EINVAL; 670 } 671 672 ret = device_property_read_u32_array(&client->dev, "adi,unlock-keys", 673 kpad->unlock_keys, 674 kpad->nkeys_unlock); 675 if (ret) 676 return ret; 677 678 for (i = 0; i < kpad->nkeys_unlock; i++) { 679 /* 680 * Even though it should be possible (as stated in the datasheet) 681 * to use GPIs (which are part of the keys event) as unlock keys, 682 * it was not working at all and was leading to overflow events 683 * at some point. Hence, for now, let's just allow keys which are 684 * part of keypad matrix to be used and if a reliable way of 685 * using GPIs is found, this condition can be removed/lightened. 686 */ 687 if (kpad->unlock_keys[i] >= kpad->cols * kpad->rows) { 688 dev_err(&client->dev, "Invalid unlock key(%d)\n", 689 kpad->unlock_keys[i]); 690 return -EINVAL; 691 } 692 693 /* 694 * fw properties keys start from 0 but on the device they 695 * start from 1. 696 */ 697 kpad->unlock_keys[i] += 1; 698 } 699 700 return 0; 701 } 702 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://01.org/lkp
