--- /dev/null
+From 851fa0ece6d805ad83696480a04aa6d142af2669 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 14:09:08 +0200
+Subject: drm/i915/wakeref: clean up INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* flag macros
+
+From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+
+[ Upstream commit 524696a19e34598c9173fdd5b32fb7e5d16a91d3 ]
+
+Commit 469c1c9eb6c9 ("kernel-doc: Issue warnings that were silently
+discarded") started emitting warnings for cases that were previously
+silently discarded. One such case is in intel_wakeref.h:
+
+Warning: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h:156 expecting prototype
+ for __intel_wakeref_put(). Prototype was for INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC()
+ instead
+
+Arguably kernel-doc should be able to handle this, as it's valid C, but
+having the flags defined between the function declarator and the body is
+just asking for trouble. Move the INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* macros away from
+there, making kernel-doc's life easier.
+
+While at it, reduce the unnecessary abstraction levels by removing the
+enum, and append _MASK to INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY for clarity.
+
+Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
+Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
+Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251215120908.3515578-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
+Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+---
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c | 2 +-
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h | 14 +++++---------
+ 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+index dea2f63184f89..40fbf2ccaee21 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ void __intel_wakeref_put_last(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+ /* Assume we are not in process context and so cannot sleep. */
+ if (flags & INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC || !mutex_trylock(&wf->mutex)) {
+ mod_delayed_work(wf->i915->unordered_wq, &wf->work,
+- FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, flags));
++ FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, flags));
+ return;
+ }
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+index 68aa3be482515..ca4c4a91a49fd 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+@@ -131,17 +131,16 @@ intel_wakeref_get_if_active(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ return atomic_inc_not_zero(&wf->count);
+ }
+
+-enum {
+- INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT = 0,
+- __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__
+-};
+-
+ static inline void
+ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ {
+ might_lock(&wf->mutex);
+ }
+
++/* flags for __intel_wakeref_put() and __intel_wakeref_put_last */
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(0)
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, 1)
++
+ /**
+ * __intel_wakeref_put: Release the wakeref
+ * @wf: the wakeref
+@@ -157,9 +156,6 @@ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ */
+ static inline void
+ __intel_wakeref_put(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY \
+- GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__)
+ {
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&wf->count) <= 0);
+ if (unlikely(!atomic_add_unless(&wf->count, -1, 1)))
+@@ -184,7 +180,7 @@ intel_wakeref_put_delay(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long delay)
+ {
+ __intel_wakeref_put(wf,
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC |
+- FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, delay));
++ FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, delay));
+ }
+
+ static inline void
+--
+2.51.0
+
tracing-wake-up-poll-waiters-for-hist-files-when-rem.patch
ntb-ntb_transport-fix-too-small-buffer-for-debugfs_n.patch
alsa-pcm-revert-bufs-move-in-snd_pcm_xfern_frames_io.patch
+drm-i915-wakeref-clean-up-intel_wakeref_put_-flag-ma.patch
--- /dev/null
+From cc13c6904d2d8185dc8d689c66d51ccf1991cdca Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 14:09:08 +0200
+Subject: drm/i915/wakeref: clean up INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* flag macros
+
+From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+
+[ Upstream commit 524696a19e34598c9173fdd5b32fb7e5d16a91d3 ]
+
+Commit 469c1c9eb6c9 ("kernel-doc: Issue warnings that were silently
+discarded") started emitting warnings for cases that were previously
+silently discarded. One such case is in intel_wakeref.h:
+
+Warning: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h:156 expecting prototype
+ for __intel_wakeref_put(). Prototype was for INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC()
+ instead
+
+Arguably kernel-doc should be able to handle this, as it's valid C, but
+having the flags defined between the function declarator and the body is
+just asking for trouble. Move the INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* macros away from
+there, making kernel-doc's life easier.
+
+While at it, reduce the unnecessary abstraction levels by removing the
+enum, and append _MASK to INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY for clarity.
+
+Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
+Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
+Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251215120908.3515578-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
+Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+---
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c | 2 +-
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h | 14 +++++---------
+ 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+index 7fa194de5d35b..5bd75a35d0a39 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ void __intel_wakeref_put_last(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+ /* Assume we are not in process context and so cannot sleep. */
+ if (flags & INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC || !mutex_trylock(&wf->mutex)) {
+ mod_delayed_work(wf->i915->unordered_wq, &wf->work,
+- FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, flags));
++ FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, flags));
+ return;
+ }
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+index a2894a56e18fc..81308bac34bab 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+@@ -128,17 +128,16 @@ intel_wakeref_get_if_active(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ return atomic_inc_not_zero(&wf->count);
+ }
+
+-enum {
+- INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT = 0,
+- __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__
+-};
+-
+ static inline void
+ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ {
+ might_lock(&wf->mutex);
+ }
+
++/* flags for __intel_wakeref_put() and __intel_wakeref_put_last */
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(0)
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, 1)
++
+ /**
+ * __intel_wakeref_put: Release the wakeref
+ * @wf: the wakeref
+@@ -154,9 +153,6 @@ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ */
+ static inline void
+ __intel_wakeref_put(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY \
+- GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__)
+ {
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&wf->count) <= 0);
+ if (unlikely(!atomic_add_unless(&wf->count, -1, 1)))
+@@ -181,7 +177,7 @@ intel_wakeref_put_delay(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long delay)
+ {
+ __intel_wakeref_put(wf,
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC |
+- FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, delay));
++ FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, delay));
+ }
+
+ static inline void
+--
+2.51.0
+
ntb-ntb_transport-fix-too-small-buffer-for-debugfs_n.patch
alsa-pcm-revert-bufs-move-in-snd_pcm_xfern_frames_io.patch
revert-acpi-processor-update-cpuidle-driver-check-in.patch
+drm-i915-wakeref-clean-up-intel_wakeref_put_-flag-ma.patch
--- /dev/null
+From ce0e5eb7c2ff7cec89e6ea94092902f6a16fd888 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 14:09:08 +0200
+Subject: drm/i915/wakeref: clean up INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* flag macros
+
+From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+
+[ Upstream commit 524696a19e34598c9173fdd5b32fb7e5d16a91d3 ]
+
+Commit 469c1c9eb6c9 ("kernel-doc: Issue warnings that were silently
+discarded") started emitting warnings for cases that were previously
+silently discarded. One such case is in intel_wakeref.h:
+
+Warning: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h:156 expecting prototype
+ for __intel_wakeref_put(). Prototype was for INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC()
+ instead
+
+Arguably kernel-doc should be able to handle this, as it's valid C, but
+having the flags defined between the function declarator and the body is
+just asking for trouble. Move the INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* macros away from
+there, making kernel-doc's life easier.
+
+While at it, reduce the unnecessary abstraction levels by removing the
+enum, and append _MASK to INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY for clarity.
+
+Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
+Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
+Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251215120908.3515578-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
+Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+---
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c | 2 +-
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h | 14 +++++---------
+ 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+index b1883dccc22af..98e7cee4e1dcc 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ void __intel_wakeref_put_last(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+ /* Assume we are not in process context and so cannot sleep. */
+ if (flags & INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC || !mutex_trylock(&wf->mutex)) {
+ mod_delayed_work(wf->i915->unordered_wq, &wf->work,
+- FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, flags));
++ FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, flags));
+ return;
+ }
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+index a2894a56e18fc..81308bac34bab 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+@@ -128,17 +128,16 @@ intel_wakeref_get_if_active(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ return atomic_inc_not_zero(&wf->count);
+ }
+
+-enum {
+- INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT = 0,
+- __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__
+-};
+-
+ static inline void
+ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ {
+ might_lock(&wf->mutex);
+ }
+
++/* flags for __intel_wakeref_put() and __intel_wakeref_put_last */
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(0)
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, 1)
++
+ /**
+ * __intel_wakeref_put: Release the wakeref
+ * @wf: the wakeref
+@@ -154,9 +153,6 @@ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ */
+ static inline void
+ __intel_wakeref_put(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY \
+- GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__)
+ {
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&wf->count) <= 0);
+ if (unlikely(!atomic_add_unless(&wf->count, -1, 1)))
+@@ -181,7 +177,7 @@ intel_wakeref_put_delay(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long delay)
+ {
+ __intel_wakeref_put(wf,
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC |
+- FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, delay));
++ FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, delay));
+ }
+
+ static inline void
+--
+2.51.0
+
ntb-ntb_transport-fix-too-small-buffer-for-debugfs_n.patch
alsa-pcm-revert-bufs-move-in-snd_pcm_xfern_frames_io.patch
revert-acpi-processor-update-cpuidle-driver-check-in.patch
+drm-i915-wakeref-clean-up-intel_wakeref_put_-flag-ma.patch
--- /dev/null
+From 1e2a2377dffca770244c79bab5456baa91edc252 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 14:09:08 +0200
+Subject: drm/i915/wakeref: clean up INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* flag macros
+
+From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+
+[ Upstream commit 524696a19e34598c9173fdd5b32fb7e5d16a91d3 ]
+
+Commit 469c1c9eb6c9 ("kernel-doc: Issue warnings that were silently
+discarded") started emitting warnings for cases that were previously
+silently discarded. One such case is in intel_wakeref.h:
+
+Warning: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h:156 expecting prototype
+ for __intel_wakeref_put(). Prototype was for INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC()
+ instead
+
+Arguably kernel-doc should be able to handle this, as it's valid C, but
+having the flags defined between the function declarator and the body is
+just asking for trouble. Move the INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_* macros away from
+there, making kernel-doc's life easier.
+
+While at it, reduce the unnecessary abstraction levels by removing the
+enum, and append _MASK to INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY for clarity.
+
+Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
+Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
+Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
+Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251215120908.3515578-1-jani.nikula@intel.com
+Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
+Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
+---
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c | 2 +-
+ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h | 14 +++++---------
+ 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+index 718f2f1b6174d..a2bffa4a4dd15 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ void __intel_wakeref_put_last(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+ /* Assume we are not in process context and so cannot sleep. */
+ if (flags & INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC || !mutex_trylock(&wf->mutex)) {
+ mod_delayed_work(wf->i915->unordered_wq, &wf->work,
+- FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, flags));
++ FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, flags));
+ return;
+ }
+
+diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+index ec881b0973689..9923628d706cc 100644
+--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
++++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h
+@@ -119,17 +119,16 @@ intel_wakeref_get_if_active(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ return atomic_inc_not_zero(&wf->count);
+ }
+
+-enum {
+- INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT = 0,
+- __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__
+-};
+-
+ static inline void
+ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ {
+ might_lock(&wf->mutex);
+ }
+
++/* flags for __intel_wakeref_put() and __intel_wakeref_put_last */
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(0)
++#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, 1)
++
+ /**
+ * __intel_wakeref_put: Release the wakeref
+ * @wf: the wakeref
+@@ -145,9 +144,6 @@ intel_wakeref_might_get(struct intel_wakeref *wf)
+ */
+ static inline void
+ __intel_wakeref_put(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC BIT(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC_BIT)
+-#define INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY \
+- GENMASK(BITS_PER_LONG - 1, __INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_LAST_BIT__)
+ {
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&wf->count) <= 0);
+ if (unlikely(!atomic_add_unless(&wf->count, -1, 1)))
+@@ -172,7 +168,7 @@ intel_wakeref_put_delay(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long delay)
+ {
+ __intel_wakeref_put(wf,
+ INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC |
+- FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, delay));
++ FIELD_PREP(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY_MASK, delay));
+ }
+
+ static inline void
+--
+2.51.0
+
tracing-fix-checking-of-freed-trace_event_file-for-h.patch
tracing-wake-up-poll-waiters-for-hist-files-when-rem.patch
ntb-ntb_transport-fix-too-small-buffer-for-debugfs_n.patch
+drm-i915-wakeref-clean-up-intel_wakeref_put_-flag-ma.patch
projects / thirdparty / kernel / stable-queue.git / commitdiff
