linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:46:37 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Michal Marek wrote:

> On 2016-04-26 22:48, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> >> Hi Nicolas,
> >>
> >> On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:40:57 -0400 (EDT) Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If you can reproduce this build failure, could you try a make mrproper 
> >>> and attempt it again?  I, too, would like to find an explanation and a 
> >>> way to reproduce.
> >>
> >> I reset my build tree to commit 9d67df654092 ("Merge remote-tracking
> >> branch 'block/for-next'") and the build failed with:
> >>
> >> ERROR: ".local_clock" [drivers/vhost/vhost_net.ko] undefined!
> >> ERROR: ".local_clock" [drivers/misc/cxl/cxl.ko] undefined!
> >>
> >> :-(
> >>
> >> So I did a "make mrproper" and did the build again.
> >>
> >> That built correctly.
> >>
> > [...]
> > 
> > OK!  After digging and diffing through 750 megabytes of make debug logs 
> > I finally found the explanation.  The if_changed directive is useless 
> > against phony targets.
> > 
> > @Stephen: could you replace the revert with the patch below in your tree?
> > 
> > @Michal: could you fold the patch below into commit 2441e78b19 in your tree?
> 
> I prefer not to overwrite the topic branches unless necessary and I
> wanted to credit Stephen, so I committed your patch with a fabricated
> commit message and your signoff (since you wanted to fold it into a
> patch that you had already signed off).

Fine with me.


Nicolas