Closed galak closed 3 years ago
@carlescufi please re-assign this as needed.
@ceolin you should not be filter hardware in subsystems, this needs to be done on the test level
diff --git a/subsys/power/Kconfig b/subsys/power/Kconfig
index 84e180ffca..c3e676da6f 100644
--- a/subsys/power/Kconfig
+++ b/subsys/power/Kconfig
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ config SYS_POWER_MANAGEMENT
menuconfig PM
bool "System Power management"
select TICKLESS_IDLE
- depends on SYS_CLOCK_EXISTS && !SOC_NRF5340_CPUNET_QKAA
+ depends on SYS_CLOCK_EXISTS
help
This option enables the board to implement extra power management
policies whenever the kernel becomes idle. The kernel informs the
this boils down to this board failing when CONFIG_PM is enabled (which enables build of soc/arm/nordic_nrf/nrf53/power.c
with the following failure:
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/modules/hal/nordic/nrfx/hal/nrf_regulators.h:138:50: error: unknown type name 'NRF_REGULATORS_Type'; did you mean 'NRF_REGULATORS_H__'?
138 | NRF_STATIC_INLINE void nrf_regulators_dcdcen_set(NRF_REGULATORS_Type * p_reg, bool enable);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| NRF_REGULATORS_H__
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/modules/hal/nordic/nrfx/hal/nrf_regulators.h:150:50: error: unknown type name 'NRF_REGULATORS_Type'; did you mean 'NRF_REGULATORS_H__'?
150 | NRF_STATIC_INLINE void nrf_regulators_system_off(NRF_REGULATORS_Type * p_reg);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| NRF_REGULATORS_H__
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/modules/hal/nordic/nrfx/hal/nrf_regulators.h:234:50: error: unknown type name 'NRF_REGULATORS_Type'; did you mean 'NRF_REGULATORS_H__'?
234 | NRF_STATIC_INLINE void nrf_regulators_dcdcen_set(NRF_REGULATORS_Type * p_reg, bool enable)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| NRF_REGULATORS_H__
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/modules/hal/nordic/nrfx/hal/nrf_regulators.h:243:50: error: unknown type name 'NRF_REGULATORS_Type'; did you mean 'NRF_REGULATORS_H__'?
243 | NRF_STATIC_INLINE void nrf_regulators_system_off(NRF_REGULATORS_Type * p_reg)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| NRF_REGULATORS_H__
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/zephyr/soc/arm/nordic_nrf/nrf53/power.c: In function 'pm_power_state_set':
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/zephyr/soc/arm/nordic_nrf/nrf53/power.c:20:3: warning: implicit declaration of function 'nrf_regulators_system_off' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
20 | nrf_regulators_system_off(NRF_REGULATORS);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/zephyr/soc/arm/nordic_nrf/nrf53/power.c:20:29: error: 'NRF_REGULATORS' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'NRF_REGULATORS_H__'?
20 | nrf_regulators_system_off(NRF_REGULATORS);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| NRF_REGULATORS_H__
/home/nashif/Work/zephyrproject/zephyr/soc/arm/nordic_nrf/nrf53/power.c:20:29: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
Should building of power.c in the SoC depend on something else to prevent that or to correctly pull in regulator support? @pabigot ?
patch incoming.
@ceolin you should not be filter hardware in subsystems, this needs to be done on the test level
diff --git a/subsys/power/Kconfig b/subsys/power/Kconfig index 84e180ffca..c3e676da6f 100644 --- a/subsys/power/Kconfig +++ b/subsys/power/Kconfig @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ config SYS_POWER_MANAGEMENT menuconfig PM bool "System Power management" select TICKLESS_IDLE - depends on SYS_CLOCK_EXISTS && !SOC_NRF5340_CPUNET_QKAA + depends on SYS_CLOCK_EXISTS help This option enables the board to implement extra power management policies whenever the kernel becomes idle. The kernel informs the
gotcha, but IMHO tit is not just exclude this target from the test as the proposed patch, but also remove CONFIG_PM for this target.
https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/issues/31627 should complement #31714
Gets: