On 4/10/2025 7:50 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
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?
Really - I think we probably should change all of pinctrl-amd.c to use
CONFIG_SUSPEND.
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?
Sure; I'll spin again and get something out to cover both cases soon.
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
