linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] PCI changes for 2.6.30

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]

Message-ID: <20090401101309.67d0bea5@hobbes>
Date:	Wed, 1 Apr 2009 10:13:09 -0700
From:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] PCI changes for 2.6.30

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 10:01:12 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> >
> > Please consider pulling my PCI tree from
> >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jbarnes/pci-2.6
> > linux-next
> 
> This produces
> 
>   WARNING: drivers/built-in.o(.text+0x69a1): Section mismatch in
> reference from the function dev_rescan_store() to the
> function .devinit.text:pci_rescan_bus() The function
> dev_rescan_store() references the function __devinit
> pci_rescan_bus(). This is often because dev_rescan_store lacks a
> __devinit annotation or the annotation of pci_rescan_bus is wrong.
> 
> Hmm?

Arg how did I miss that?  Maybe the last build I did was missing
hotplug support or something... Anyway looking now (at first glance I
think pci_rescan_bus needs to drop __devinit).

> > Anyway hope this pull is ok.  I went through every warning by hand
> > to make sure none were caused by PCI commits, but that was with the
> > bits in this tree, which are -rc8 vintage.
> 
> You can tell it's rebased, but at least it's not rebased five minutes
> ago, so I assume it has some testing. It's the "I just rebased a
> couple of minutes before posting this 'please pull' message" that I
> find really annoying, since it's so clear that the end result has no
> real testing at all.

Yeah, this tree generally sees a good amount of testing, especially
from the hotplug folks.  And yeah, I'd never rebase and then do a pull
request; I like to let things sit in linux-next for at least a day to
flush out any build errors and give a chance for people to test any
merge conflicts I resolved.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/