linux-kernel - Re: 0-day bot a bit too verbose (was Re: [linux-review:Pavel-Machek/hid-led-c-remove-unneccessary-underscores/20161003-162139 1/1] drivers/hid/hid-led.c:60:3: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'le16')

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: <20161003135238.kef4vlkwglngsiw7@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Oct 2016 21:52:38 +0800
From:   Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:     kbuild-all@...org, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 0-day bot a bit too verbose (was Re:
 [linux-review:Pavel-Machek/hid-led-c-remove-unneccessary-underscores/20161003-162139
 1/1] drivers/hid/hid-led.c:60:3: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list
 before 'le16')

Hi Pavel,

On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 01:22:10PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>Hi!
>
>> tree:   https://github.com/0day-ci/linux Pavel-Machek/hid-led-c-remove-unneccessary-underscores/20161003-162139
>> head:   596471d181ad324301428001db102c810df4a6de
>> commit: 596471d181ad324301428001db102c810df4a6de [1/1] hid-led.c: remove unneccessary underscores
>> config: openrisc-allmodconfig (attached as .config)
>> compiler: or32-linux-gcc (GCC) 4.5.1-or32-1.0rc1
>> reproduce:
>>         wget https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git/plain/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
>>         chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
>>         git checkout 596471d181ad324301428001db102c810df4a6de
>>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>>         make.cross ARCH=openrisc
>>
>> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
>I get it, it does not compile anywhere, because I made a mistake. Ok?
>
>But I know now, and if it does not compile on x86, there's very very
>little chance that it would compile on openrisc.
>
>Can we stop the announcements after first or second failure?

Sorry for the extra noises!

The build bot will stop complaining after 3 reports on the same
commit. Shall I further reduce the threshold to 1 or 2? It'll risk
hiding real different/independent errors though.

Thanks,
Fengguang