Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the bitmap tree

[Yury Norov]

On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 09:37:25AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Miquel,
> 
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 at 09:31, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>  /* non compile-time field get/prep */
> > >> -#define field_get(_mask, _reg) (((_reg) & (_mask)) >> (ffs(_mask) - 1))
> > >> -#define field_prep(_mask, _val) (((_val) << (ffs(_mask) - 1)) & (_mask))
> > >> +#define sunxi_field_get(_mask, _reg) (((_reg) & (_mask)) >> (ffs(_mask) - 1))
> > >> +#define sunxi_field_prep(_mask, _val) (((_val) << (ffs(_mask) - 1)) & (_mask))
> > >
> > > See "[PATCH -next v6 11/26] mtd: rawnand: sunxi: #undef
> > > field_{get,prep}() before local definition"[1] and follow-up
> > > "[PATCH -next v6 24/26] mtd: rawnand: sunxi: Convert to common
> > > field_{get,prep}() helpers"[2].
> > > The former unfortunately didn't make it into the nand tree yet...
> > >
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/703d7eec56074148daed4ea45b637f8a83f15305.1762435376.git.geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx
> > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/e1c879967328d8c1098aaa014845c2f11874d7c7.1762435376.git.geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > It wasn't clear to me when/if I could effectively pull these, nor if
> > they would make it for this release. Were you (or someone else) supposed
> > to carry these on your own? Or, can I just apply these two now?
> 
> The first one you can apply now, to fix the build issue.
> The second one has to wait until the changes to <linux/bitfield.h>
> are in your tree.

Is anything expected on my side? Should I drop the trouble patch, or
just wait, or something else?