Re: linux-next: Tree for Dec 16 (drm_panel & intel_panel)

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 1:56 PM Steven Price <steven.price@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 17/12/2019 06:37, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On 12/16/19 9:42 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 08:25:11AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >>> On 12/15/19 9:22 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> >>> on x86_64:
> >>>
> >>> ld: drivers/gpu/drm/drm_panel.o: in function `drm_panel_of_backlight':
> >>> (.text+0x2ee): undefined reference to `devm_of_find_backlight'
> >>>
> >>> ld: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_panel.o: in function `intel_backlight_device_register':
> >>> intel_panel.c:(.text+0x593e): undefined reference to `backlight_device_register'
> >>> ld: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_panel.o: in function `intel_backlight_device_unregister':
> >>> intel_panel.c:(.text+0x5a04): undefined reference to `backlight_device_unregister'
> >>>
> >>> CONFIG_DRM_PANEL=y
> >>> CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE=m
> >>> CONFIG_DRM_I915=y
> >>>
> >>> Full randconfig file is attached.
> >>
> >> Can you please verify if you have:
> >> 907aa265fde6589b8059dc51649c6d1f49ade2f3
> >> ("drm/drm_panel: fix EXPORT of drm_panel_of_backlight")
> >>
> >> This commit is supposed to fix it.
> >>
> >>      Sam
> >>
> >
> > Hi Sam,
> > I don't have the linux-next.git tree so I can't check that.
> > I just built whatever is in linux-next of 20191216.
> >
>
> 907aa265fde6589b8059dc51649c6d1f49ade2f3 ("drm/drm_panel: fix EXPORT of
> drm_panel_of_backlight") is fixing drm_panel_of_backlight(), but the
> error above is for backlight_device_register().
>
> From what I can tell, that commit is actually the cause of the error -
> now intel_backlight_device_register() is being included in the kernel
> even though it calls backlight_device_register() which is in a module.
> Of course it also fixed the original error, so reverting it isn't any
> use.
>
> The below Kconfig change fixes the build for me, but I've no idea
> whether this is the correct fix.

I think the proper one is to have s/IS_ENABLED/IS_REACHABLE/.
It fixes issue for me.

Should I send a patch?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko