linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 4 Jan 2012 23:03:54 +0100
From:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 01:31, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 01:07:52AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 17:21, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 05:45:18PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> >> Because of the powerpc problems above, I have used the driver-core tree
>> >> from next-20111222 for today.
>> >
>> > Sorry about all of the problems, we tried to fix everything we could,
>> > but your merges and cross-builds found stuff we missed :(
>> >
>> > Kay, care to send me patches to fix this, and all of the other
>> > linux-next-reported problems to me so we can get this resolved this
>> > week?
>>
>> I rather don't want to add error checking to stuff that doesn't do it
>> today. The sysdev stuff never had that forced checks, but the normal
>> device stuff has.
>
> That's fine.
>
>> I think the force return value check is really a pretty misguided idea
>> in general, and it's up to the caller to do these checks and handle
>> rollbacks, not the driver core, I think.
>>
>> Can't we just remove that forced check?
>
> Probably, if it fixes these warning-is-an-error problems.  There were
> other issues with linux-next that were build issues, not just this one
> from what I recall, that kept Stephen from including the tree in
> linux-next.  I can bounce them to you if you missed them.

Oh, I thought that was all: "I fixed it up (see below) and can carry
the fix as necessary" material.

I might have missed some stuff, I don't see any others. Care to check
yours and let me know?

Thanks and sorry,
Kay
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/