Re: [linux-next:master 7644/8126] drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c:255:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_regulator_bulk_get_const'; did you mean 'devm_regulator_bulk_get_enable'?

[Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>]

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 7:15 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 3:18 AM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > tree:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> > head:   985bf40edf4343dcb04c33f58b40b4a85c1776d4
> > commit: e0cb0c785250d0565c19ba17fc95bd7ab97670ba [7644/8126] drm/panel: visionox-vtdr6130: switch to devm_regulator_bulk_get_const
> > config: openrisc-randconfig-r022-20230730 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240830/202408301813.TesFuSbh-lkp@intel.com/config)
> > compiler: or1k-linux-gcc (GCC) 13.3.0
> > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240830/202408301813.TesFuSbh-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
> >
> > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> > the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202408301813.TesFuSbh-lkp@intel.com/
> >
> > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >
> >    drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c: In function 'visionox_vtdr6130_probe':
> > >> drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c:255:15: error: implicit declaration of function 'devm_regulator_bulk_get_const'; did you mean 'devm_regulator_bulk_get_enable'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >      255 |         ret = devm_regulator_bulk_get_const(&dsi->dev,
> >          |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >          |               devm_regulator_bulk_get_enable
> >    cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>
> Oh! I think when I added devm_regulator_bulk_get_const() all those
> years ago I didn't add an inline-noop version. Let me post a patch
> now.

OK, I've posted:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240830073511.1.Ib733229a8a19fad8179213c05e1af01b51e42328@changeid

That should fix the issue. I assume having that go through the
regulator tree ought to be fine, though it will mean randconfig on the
DRM trees could keep hitting this failure until the DRM trees rebase
onto a kernel with the fix.

-Doug