On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:09:50AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 21 Dec 2023, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 04:58:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > After merging the backlight tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > > > allmodconfig) failed like this: > > > > > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c: In function 'mp3309c_bl_update_status': > > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c:134:23: error: implicit declaration of function 'pwm_apply_state'; did you mean 'pwm_apply_args'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > 134 | ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate); > > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > | pwm_apply_args > > > > > > Caused by commit > > > > > > c748a6d77c06 ("pwm: Rename pwm_apply_state() to pwm_apply_might_sleep()") > > > > > > interacting with commit > > > > > > 2e914516a58c ("backlight: mp3309c: Add support for MPS MP3309C") > > > > > > from the backlight tree. > > > > > > I have appplied the following merge fix patch. > > > > > > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 16:13:37 +1100 > > > Subject: [PATCH] fix up for "backlight: mp3309c: Add support for MPS MP3309C" > > > > > > from the backlight tree interacting with commit > > > > > > c748a6d77c06 ("pwm: Rename pwm_apply_state() to pwm_apply_might_sleep()") > > > > > > from the pwm tree. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c | 4 ++-- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c b/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c > > > index 34d71259fac1..b0d9aef6942b 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c > > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/mp3309c.c > > > @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static int mp3309c_bl_update_status(struct backlight_device *bl) > > > chip->pdata->levels[brightness], > > > chip->pdata->levels[chip->pdata->max_brightness]); > > > pwmstate.enabled = true; > > > - ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate); > > > + ret = pwm_apply_might_sleep(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate); > > > if (ret) > > > return ret; > > > > > > @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ static int mp3309c_probe(struct i2c_client *client) > > > chip->pdata->default_brightness, > > > chip->pdata->max_brightness); > > > pwmstate.enabled = true; > > > - ret = pwm_apply_state(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate); > > > + ret = pwm_apply_might_sleep(chip->pwmd, &pwmstate); > > > if (ret) > > > return dev_err_probe(chip->dev, ret, > > > "error setting pwm device\n"); > > > > Hi Lee, > > > > We could exchange stable tags to make this work, but given that people > > (myself included) are getting into holiday mode I'm inclined to just add > > a pwm_apply_state() compatibility inline for now and then we can address > > this in the new year or for the next cycle. What do you think? > > Sorry, why is this happening? > > I still see support for pwm_apply_state() in -next. Not any more: $ git grep pwm_apply_state linux-next/master $ Sean