[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180427115147.GA29227@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 13:51:47 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Михаил Носов <drdeimosnn@...il.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: stable 4.16.5 hmm build error
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:44:58AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:17:42AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> >>
> >> which you backported as 25df8b83e867 into linux-4.16.y after v4.16.4.
> >> After that originally landed in mainline, I found another build error that
> >> I fixed with commit
> >>
> >> 9d8a463a7016 ("mm/hmm: fix header file if/else/endif maze, again")
> >
> > Why does that commit reference:
> > Fixes: 8900d06a277a ("mm/hmm: fix header file if/else/endif maze")
> >
> > when there is no such commit in the tree?
>
> This must have happened when the commit that introduced it came through
> the -mm tree and got a new commit ID between the time I sent the fix
> and Linus picking up the patch from Andrew. I try to hand-edit the
> 'Fixes' line when I know it's a patch in -mm to say 'Fixes: mmotm ("...")'
> but I missed that his time.
>
> >> This fixes the issue that Randy is reporting now, please add that into
> >> v4.16.5.
> >
> > I tried, but it does not apply cleanly:
> > $ p1 < ../mm-hmm-fix-header-file-if-else-endif-maze-again.patch
> > checking file include/linux/hmm.h
> > Hunk #1 FAILED at 376.
> > Hunk #2 succeeded at 498 (offset -52 lines).
> > 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED
> >
> > Am I missing some other commit that went in inbetween the above patches?
>
> There were several other commits from Jérôme inbetween. I don't
> immediately see where the conflict came from, but as my patch is
> basically a revert of Jérôme's, and it was working in v4.16.4, maybe
> it's best if you drop the backport of b28b08de436a for now, let him
> comment on whether we still need it. I had not seen the build error
> he referred to in his commit and we know that it does cause a
> new one.
That's a good idea, now reverted, thanks.
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists