[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120323202414.12bc2529aa4cb5b8e781878d@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 20:24:14 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the scsi tree
Hi James,
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:20:09 +0000 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 13:00 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > After merging the scsi tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/ata/sata_svw.c: In function 'k2_sata_proc_open':
> > drivers/ata/sata_svw.c:327:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'PDE' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > drivers/ata/sata_svw.c:327:56: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'int')
> > drivers/ata/sata_svw.c:328:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
>
> That's defined in linux/proc_fs.h
>
> What was the config? Was it a no-PROCFS config, or is this just
> something that needs to be explicitly included?
See above, that was a powerpc ppc64_defconfig. It certainly has PROCFS
enabled. Almost everything needs to be explicitly included - see Rule 1
in Documentation/SubmitChecklist ...
Implicit includes are vulnerable to CONFIG changes and
architecture/platform differences in the include files. I have seen lots
of these. :-(
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists