linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] ACPI / processor_idle: introduce ARCH_SUPPORTS_ACPI_PROCESSOR

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:	Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:00:05 +0100
From:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:	kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Cc:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, kbuild-all@...org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
	Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>,
	Prashanth Prakash <pprakash@...eaurora.org>,
	Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@...aro.org>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] ACPI / processor_idle: introduce
 ARCH_SUPPORTS_ACPI_PROCESSOR_CSTATE

Hi,

On 19/04/16 13:49, kbuild test robot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [auto build test ERROR on pm/linux-next]
> [also build test ERROR on v4.6-rc4 next-20160419]
> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improving the system]
>
> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Sudeep-Holla/ACPI-processor_idle-Add-ACPI-v6-0-LPI-support/20160419-203500
> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git linux-next
> config: i386-randconfig-x000-201616 (attached as .config)
> reproduce:
>          # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>          make ARCH=i386
>
> Note: the linux-review/Sudeep-Holla/ACPI-processor_idle-Add-ACPI-v6-0-LPI-support/20160419-203500 HEAD c51fc2a756d7b0dce908a4ca043d1d458c400af5 builds fine.
>        It only hurts bisectibility.
>

Thanks for the report, it's now fixed locally.
It will part of the next version.

--
Regards,
Sudeep