linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the nand 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]

Message-ID: <20190402141631.471c3f5f@xps13>
Date:   Tue, 2 Apr 2019 14:16:31 +0200
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To:     Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the nand tree

Hi Paul,

Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net> wrote on Tue, 02 Apr 2019 14:00:14
+0200:

> Hi Miquel,
> 
> Le mar. 2 avril 2019 à 13:56, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> a écrit :
> > Hi Paul,
> > 
> > Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net> wrote on Tue, 02 Apr 2019 > 01:31:52
> > +0200:
> >   
> >>  Hi Stephen,  
> >> >>  Le mar. 2 avril 2019 à 1:14, Stephen Rothwell >> <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> a écrit :  
> >>  > Hi all,
> >>  >
> >>  > After merging the nand tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> >>  > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >>  >
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:26:5: error: >> redefinition > of 'ingenic_ecc_calculate'
> >>  >  int ingenic_ecc_calculate(struct ingenic_ecc *ecc,
> >>  >      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  > In file included from >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:14:
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.h:39:5: note: previous > >> definition of 'ingenic_ecc_calculate' was here
> >>  >  int ingenic_ecc_calculate(struct ingenic_ecc *ecc,
> >>  >      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:47:5: error: >> redefinition > of 'ingenic_ecc_correct'
> >>  >  int ingenic_ecc_correct(struct ingenic_ecc *ecc,
> >>  >      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  > In file included from >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:14:
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.h:46:5: note: previous > >> definition of 'ingenic_ecc_correct' was here
> >>  >  int ingenic_ecc_correct(struct ingenic_ecc *ecc,
> >>  >      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:93:21: error: >> redefinition > of 'of_ingenic_ecc_get'
> >>  >  struct ingenic_ecc *of_ingenic_ecc_get(struct device_node >> *of_node)
> >>  >                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  > In file included from >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:14:
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.h:57:21: note: previous >> > definition of 'of_ingenic_ecc_get' was here
> >>  >  struct ingenic_ecc *of_ingenic_ecc_get(struct device_node *np)
> >>  >                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:119:6: error: >> redefinition > of 'ingenic_ecc_release'
> >>  >  void ingenic_ecc_release(struct ingenic_ecc *ecc)
> >>  >       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  > In file included from >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.c:14:
> >>  > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/ingenic/ingenic_ecc.h:53:6: note: previous > >> definition of 'ingenic_ecc_release' was here
> >>  >  void ingenic_ecc_release(struct ingenic_ecc *ecc)
> >>  >       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>  >
> >>  > Caused by commit
> >>  >
> >>  >   8278ad0d709a ("mtd: rawnand: ingenic: Separate top-level and >> SoC > specific code")
> >>  >
> >>  > I have used the nand tree from next-20190401 for today.  
> >> >>  That makes no sense to me; from the offsets of the errors in the >> ingenic_ecc.h  
> >>  file, it seems that CONFIG_MTD_NAND_INGENIC_ECC is not set, and in >> this case
> >>  ingenic_ecc.c should not be compiled at all.  
> >> > > I think  
> > 
> >         #ifdef FOO
> > 
> > evaluates to true if
> > 
> >         FOO=y
> > 
> > while we can have
> > 
> >         FOO=m
> > 
> > which is evaluated to false, hence the double definition with
> > allmodconfig.  
> 
> That's good to know, I guess I'll have to start using IS_DEFINED()
> from now on.
> 
> > Here is a diff solving the issue, if you are fine with it I will
> > correct in-place and push -f nand/next for tomorrow's build.  
> 
> That would be great.

Done. I also pushed on 0-day, hope I'll have the notification before
tonight.


Thanks,
Miquèl