[Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for drm/i915: refactor intel_display.c + a bit more
Patchwork
patchwork at emeril.freedesktop.org
Thu Feb 4 22:47:19 UTC 2021
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915: refactor intel_display.c + a bit more
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/86723/
State : warning
== Summary ==
$ dim sparse --fast origin/drm-tip
Sparse version: v0.6.2
Fast mode used, each commit won't be checked separately.
+drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi_buf_trans.c:742:28: warning: symbol 'bdw_get_buf_trans_edp' was not declared. Should it be static?
+drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi_buf_trans.c:756:28: warning: symbol 'skl_get_buf_trans_dp' was not declared. Should it be static?
+drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi_buf_trans.c:773:28: warning: symbol 'kbl_get_buf_trans_dp' was not declared. Should it be static?
+drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi_buf_trans.c:794:28: warning: symbol 'skl_get_buf_trans_edp' was not declared. Should it be static?
+drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi_buf_trans.c:826:28: warning: symbol 'skl_get_buf_trans_hdmi' was not declared. Should it be static?
+drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi_buf_trans.c:841:5: warning: symbol 'skl_buf_trans_num_entries' was not declared. Should it be static?
+drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c:137:19: warning: context imbalance in 'wakeref_auto_timeout' - unexpected unlock
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list