[Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Jun 19 (drm/i915)

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 10:01:27PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, July 07, 2014 04:54:23 PM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:01:36AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 02:43:02 PM Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap at infradead.org> wrote:
> > > > > On 06/18/14 23:16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > >> Hi all,
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> The powerpc allyesconfig is again broken more than usual.
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Changes since 20140618:
> > > > >> 
> > > > >
> > > > > on i386:
> > > > >
> > > > > CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled.
> > > > >
> > > > >   CC      drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c: In function 'i915_drm_freeze':
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'acpi_target_system_state' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: error: 'ACPI_STATE_S3' undeclared (first use in this function)
> > > > > ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c:547:36: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> > > > >   CC      net/dccp/qpolicy.o
> > > > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> > > > > make[5]: *** [drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.o] Error 1
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for the report, we'll fix it.
> > > > 
> > > > Can anyone explain why include/linux/acpi_bus.h has #ifdef
> > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP and conditional build for a dummy inline version of
> > > > acpi_target_system_state(), *but* that does not get included or used if
> > > > CONFIG_ACPI=n? Additionally, the combination of CONFIG_ACPI=y and
> > > > CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=n does not seem to work at all.
> > > 
> > > These two things look like bugs to me.  Most likely not tested thoruoughly
> > > enough.
> > > 
> > > > So we'll really have to sprinkle #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI all over, instead of
> > > > neatly using the dummy versions that someone has gone through the
> > > > trouble of adding?
> > > 
> > > No, we don't have to.
> > 
> > Back from my vacation and I didn't see a conclusion to this issue here.
> > Rafael, have you fixed this in your acpi tree or do I need to do something
> > in drm-intel?
> 
> I was on vacation too. :-)
> 
> Please have a look if i915 includes acpi/acpi_bus.h directly anywhere.  If so,
> it should include linux/acpi.h instead.  I'll fix up the rest in the ACPI tree.

We seem to only use linux/acpi.h and acpi/(video|button).h, at least
according to a grep include.*acpi. So I think we're good in i915 land.
Thanks for taking care of this.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch