On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 11:35 PM Mario Limonciello <superm1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> > > `pinctrl_amd_s2idle_dev_ops` is hidden under both `CONFIG_ACPI` and > `CONFIG_PM_SLEEP` so the functions that use it need the same scope. Shouldn't this be CONFIG_SUSPEND given what's going on in acpi.h? Also, there is one more report regarding pinctrl_dev being unused: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/202504101106.hPCEcoHr-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u Any chance to address all of this in one patch? > Adjust checks to look for both. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202504100420.88UPkUTU-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ > Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c > index b6fafed79b289..472a5aed4cd05 100644 > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c > @@ -1209,7 +1209,7 @@ static int amd_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, gpio_dev); > acpi_register_wakeup_handler(gpio_dev->irq, amd_gpio_check_wake, gpio_dev); > -#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > +#if defined(CONFIG_ACPI) && defined(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) > acpi_register_lps0_dev(&pinctrl_amd_s2idle_dev_ops); > #endif > > @@ -1230,7 +1230,7 @@ static void amd_gpio_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > > gpiochip_remove(&gpio_dev->gc); > acpi_unregister_wakeup_handler(amd_gpio_check_wake, gpio_dev); > -#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > +#if defined(CONFIG_ACPI) && defined(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) > acpi_unregister_lps0_dev(&pinctrl_amd_s2idle_dev_ops); > #endif > } > -- > 2.43.0 > >
