Hi,
Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 11:25:16AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Pawel Laszczak <pawell@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> >>
>> >>Hi,
>> >>
>> >>On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 9:59 AM Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 04:34:58PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> >>> > Hi all,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > After merging the usb tree, today's linux-next build (arm
>> >>> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > arm-linux-gnueabi-ld: drivers/usb/dwc3/trace.o: in function `trace_raw_output_dwc3_log_ctrl':
>> >>> > trace.c:(.text+0x119c): undefined reference to `usb_decode_ctrl'
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Caused by commit
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 3db1b636c07e ("usb:gadget Separated decoding functions from dwc3 driver.")
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I have used the usb tree from next-20190703 for today.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > This also occurs in the usb-gadget tree so I have used the version of
>> >>> > that from next-20190703 as well.
>> >>>
>> >>> Odd, I thought I pulled the usb-gadget tree into mine. Felipe, can you
>> >>> take a look at this to see if I messed something up?
>> >>
>> >>This looks like it was caused by Pawel's patches.
>> >>
>> >>I'll try to reproduce here and see what's causing it.
>> >
>> > Problem is in my Patch. I reproduced it, but I don't understand why compiler
>> > complains about usb_decode_ctrl. It's compiled into libcomposite.ko and
>> > declaration is in drivers/usb/gadget.h.
>>
>> That's because in multi_v7_defconfig dwc3 is built-in while libcomposite
>> is a module:
>>
>> CONFIG_USB_DWC3=y
>> CONFIG_USB_LIBCOMPOSITE=m
>>
>>
>> I remember that when you were doing this work, I asked you to move
>> functions to usb/common. Why did you deviate from that suggestion? It's
>> clear that decoding a ctrl request can be used by peripheral and host
>> and we wouldn't have to deal with this problem if you had just followed
>> the suggestion.
>>
>> Now we have to come up with a way to fix this that doesn't involve
>> reverting my part2 tag in its entirety because there are other important
>> things there.
>>
>> This is what I get for trusting people to do their part. I couldn't even
>> compile test this since I don't have ARM compilers anymore (actually,
>> just installed to test). Your customer, however, uses ARM cores so I
>> would expect you to have at least compile tested this on ARM. How come
>> this wasn't verified by anybody at TI?
>>
>> TI used to have automated testing for many of the important defconfigs,
>> is that completely gone? Are you guys relying entirely on linux-next?
>>
>> Greg, if you prefer, please revert my part2 tag. If you do so, please
>> let me know so I can drop the tag and commits from my tree as well.
>
> How do I revert a tag? How about I just revert individual commits,
> which ones should I revert?
Anything from Pawel. Here's the full list:
573aff747ee3 usb:cdns3 Fix for stuck packets in on-chip OUT buffer.
8bc1901ca7b0 usb:cdns3 Add Cadence USB3 DRD Driver
c2af6b07803e usb:gadget Simplify usb_decode_get_set_descriptor function.
ca888ce7495e usb:gadget Patch simplify usb_decode_set_clear_feature function.
3db1b636c07e usb:gadget Separated decoding functions from dwc3 driver.
e8a8b40cc892 dt-bindings: add binding for USBSS-DRD controller.
I just tested a branch without these patches and it builds fine:
$ make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf- multi_v7_defconfig
HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/conf.o
HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/confdata.o
HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/expr.o
HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/lexer.lex.o
HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/parser.tab.o
HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/preprocess.o
HOSTCC scripts/kconfig/symbol.o
HOSTLD scripts/kconfig/conf
#
# configuration written to .config
#
$ make ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabihf- -j32 -s
$
--
balbi
