Hi Srinivas, srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:10:19 +0000: > Hi Miquel, > > On 11/12/2023 10:30, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > Hi Srinivas, > > > > srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Mon, 11 Dec 2023 10:23:40 +0000: > > > >> Thankyou Stephen for the patch. > >> > >> On 11/12/2023 05:49, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> After merging the nvmem tree, today's linux-next build (i386 defconfig) > >>> failed like this: > >>> > >>> /home/sfr/next/next/drivers/nvmem/core.c: In function 'nvmem_cell_put': > >>> /home/sfr/next/next/drivers/nvmem/core.c:1603:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'nvmem_layout_module_put' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > >>> 1603 | nvmem_layout_module_put(nvmem); > >>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >>> > >>> Caused by commit > >>> > >>> ed7778e43271 ("nvmem: core: Rework layouts to become regular devices") > >>> > >>> I have applied the following patch for today. > >>> > >>> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 16:34:34 +1100 > >>> Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "nvmem: core: Rework layouts to become regular devices" > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/nvmem/core.c | 5 +++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c > >>> index 9fc452e8ada8..784b61eb4d8e 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c > >>> @@ -1491,6 +1491,11 @@ struct nvmem_cell *of_nvmem_cell_get(struct device_node *np, const char *id) > >>> return cell; > >>> } > >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_nvmem_cell_get); > >>> + > >>> +#else /* IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) */ > >>> + > >>> +static inline void nvmem_layout_module_put(struct nvmem_device *nvmem) { } > >>> + > >> > >> I see no reason why nvmem_layout_module_put() should be even under IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF). > >> > >> Updated the patch with this fixed. > > > > Ok, works for me. I will send a fixup with the doc change (see the > > other kernel test robot report) so you can squash it as well with the > > original patch. > > > if you have fix up ready, can you send it. Actually I mixed up two e-mails, I think this is all what is needed on your branch. I don't have anything else. I thought there was a kernel doc warning but I cannot find it anymore, so I believe I read my e-mail too quickly. Thanks, Miquèl