[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/amd: Compile fix for amdgpu_dm.c

[Boris Brezillon]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 13:54:48 +0100
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon at bootlin.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 13:44:13 +0200
> Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > Fix compilation issue with CONFIG_DRM_AMDGPU on:
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c: In function ‘amdgpu_dm_mode_config_init’:
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c:1666:30: error: passing argument 1 of ‘drm_atomic_private_obj_init’ from incompatible pointer type
> > 
> > Fixes: b962a12050a3 ("drm/atomic: integrate modeset lock with private objects")
> > Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com>
> > Cc: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon at bootlin.com>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
> > Cc: Tomi Sarvela <tomi.p.sarvela at intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c | 3 ++-
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
> > index 1691864bf59b..fd3ed2ce9cb1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm.c
> > @@ -1663,7 +1663,8 @@ static int amdgpu_dm_mode_config_init(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
> >  
> >  	dc_resource_state_copy_construct_current(adev->dm.dc, state->context);
> >  
> > -	drm_atomic_private_obj_init(&adev->dm.atomic_obj,
> > +	drm_atomic_private_obj_init(adev->ddev,
> > +				    &adev->dm.atomic_obj,
> >  				    &state->base,
> >  				    &dm_atomic_state_funcs);  
> 
> Hm, looks like drm-misc-next does not have this call to
> drm_atomic_private_obj_init() which explains why I didn't patch the
> file.

Looks like this call to drm_atomic_private_obj_init() was introduced by
eb3dc8978596 ("drm/amd/display: Use private obj helpers for
dm_atomic_state") which is present in drm-next. Dave, Daniel, Sean,
Marteen, not sure how you want to fix that. Should we merge drm-next in
drm-misc-next and fix the conflict there, or should Dave fix it
when merging drm-misc-next in drm-next? Another option would be to
simply revert the change and apply it in the next release.