Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the sound-asoc tree got a conflict in:
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h
between commit:
cfa289fd4986c ("drm/amdgpu: rename amdgpu_dpm_funcs to amd_pm_funcs")
from the drm-misc tree and commit:
1e4448648333a ("drm/amdgpu Moving amdgpu asic types to a separate file")
from the sound-asoc tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h index de6fc2731b98,3a49fbd8baf8..000000000000 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h @@@ -23,37 -23,10 +23,39 @@@ #ifndef __AMD_SHARED_H__ #define __AMD_SHARED_H__
- #define AMD_MAX_USEC_TIMEOUT 200000 /* 200 ms */ + #include <drm/amd_asic_type.h>
+struct seq_file; + +/* + * Supported ASIC types + */ +enum amd_asic_type { + CHIP_TAHITI = 0, + CHIP_PITCAIRN, + CHIP_VERDE, + CHIP_OLAND, + CHIP_HAINAN, + CHIP_BONAIRE, + CHIP_KAVERI, + CHIP_KABINI, + CHIP_HAWAII, + CHIP_MULLINS, + CHIP_TOPAZ, + CHIP_TONGA, + CHIP_FIJI, + CHIP_CARRIZO, + CHIP_STONEY, + CHIP_POLARIS10, + CHIP_POLARIS11, + CHIP_POLARIS12, + CHIP_VEGA10, + CHIP_RAVEN, + CHIP_LAST, +}; + + #define AMD_MAX_USEC_TIMEOUT 200000 /* 200 ms */ + /* * Chip flags */
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:57:33AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
Actually I'm just going to discard the AMD drivers from the ASoC tree because the build produces reams of errors like those below, the changes to move the chip type definitions around weren't fully baked. Please resend both the pull request and the patches with this fixed. Note also that if you're basing something on Linus' tree you should use a tagged release rather than just a random commit.
In file included from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h:51:0, from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_connectors.c:31: /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../include/amd_shared.h:33:6: error: nested redefinition of 'enum amd_asic_type' enum amd_asic_type { ^ /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../include/amd_shared.h:33:6: error: redeclaration of 'enum amd_asic_type' In file included from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../include/amd_shared.h:26:0, from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h:51, from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_connectors.c:31: /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/include/drm/amd_asic_type.h:28:6: note: originally defined here enum amd_asic_type { ^
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@kernel.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 6:08 AM To: Deucher, Alexander; Mukunda, Vijendar; Zhu, Rex; Daniel Vetter; Intel Graphics; DRI; Liam Girdwood Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List; Linux Kernel Mailing List; alsa-devel@alsa- project.org Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sound-asoc tree with the drm- misc tree
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:57:33AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your
tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
Actually I'm just going to discard the AMD drivers from the ASoC tree because the build produces reams of errors like those below, the changes to move the chip type definitions around weren't fully baked. Please resend both the pull request and the patches with this fixed. Note also that if you're basing something on Linus' tree you should use a tagged release rather than just a random commit.
Your conflict change affectively reverted 1e4448648333a which is what caused the problem. It looks like Dave did not yet pull the request I made. I can send another pull request, but you may run into the same issue if you resolve the conflict the same way again.
Alex
In file included from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h:51:0, from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_conn ectors.c:31: /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../include/amd _shared.h:33:6: error: nested redefinition of 'enum amd_asic_type' enum amd_asic_type { ^ /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../include/amd _shared.h:33:6: error: redeclaration of 'enum amd_asic_type' In file included from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../include/amd _shared.h:26:0, from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h:51, from /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_conn ectors.c:31: /home/broonie/tmpfs/next/include/drm/amd_asic_type.h:28:6: note: originally defined here enum amd_asic_type { ^
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 02:33:37PM +0000, Deucher, Alexander wrote:
Please fix your mail client to word wrap within paragraphs at something substantially less than 80 columns. Doing this makes your messages much easier to read and reply to.
Your conflict change affectively reverted 1e4448648333a which is what caused the problem. It looks like Dave did not yet pull the request I made. I can send another pull request, but you may run into the same issue if you resolve the conflict the same way again.
OK... I really wasn't expecting to see any conflicts at all TBH. I'll have a look tomorrow.
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@kernel.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 5:58 AM To: Deucher, Alexander; Mukunda, Vijendar; Zhu, Rex; Daniel Vetter; Intel Graphics; DRI; Liam Girdwood Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List; Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the sound-asoc tree with the drm-misc tree
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the sound-asoc tree got a conflict in:
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h
between commit:
cfa289fd4986c ("drm/amdgpu: rename amdgpu_dpm_funcs to amd_pm_funcs")
from the drm-misc tree and commit:
1e4448648333a ("drm/amdgpu Moving amdgpu asic types to a separate file")
The patch below effectively reverts 1e4448648333a. If you drop the patch below, you should be fine.
Alex
from the sound-asoc tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h index de6fc2731b98,3a49fbd8baf8..000000000000 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/include/amd_shared.h @@@ -23,37 -23,10 +23,39 @@@ #ifndef __AMD_SHARED_H__ #define __AMD_SHARED_H__
- #define AMD_MAX_USEC_TIMEOUT 200000 /* 200 ms */
- #include <drm/amd_asic_type.h>
+struct seq_file;
+/*
- Supported ASIC types
- */
+enum amd_asic_type {
- CHIP_TAHITI = 0,
- CHIP_PITCAIRN,
- CHIP_VERDE,
- CHIP_OLAND,
- CHIP_HAINAN,
- CHIP_BONAIRE,
- CHIP_KAVERI,
- CHIP_KABINI,
- CHIP_HAWAII,
- CHIP_MULLINS,
- CHIP_TOPAZ,
- CHIP_TONGA,
- CHIP_FIJI,
- CHIP_CARRIZO,
- CHIP_STONEY,
- CHIP_POLARIS10,
- CHIP_POLARIS11,
- CHIP_POLARIS12,
- CHIP_VEGA10,
- CHIP_RAVEN,
- CHIP_LAST,
+};
- #define AMD_MAX_USEC_TIMEOUT 200000 /* 200 ms */
- /*
*/
- Chip flags
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 02:30:50PM +0000, Deucher, Alexander wrote:
The patch below effectively reverts 1e4448648333a. If you drop the patch below, you should be fine.
As I said in my followup mail I've dropped all these patches due to build failures, please resend both the pull request and the patches with any required fixups.
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
-
Deucher, Alexander -
Mark Brown