linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190918215522.GU2596@sirena.co.uk>
Date:   Wed, 18 Sep 2019 22:55:23 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        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 driver-core tree

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 12:03:17PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 06:09:52PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > > After merging the driver-core tree, today's linux-next build
> > > for arm64 allmodconfig failed like this:

> > Wait, I thought Linus said this fixup was now resolved.  What went
> > wrong?

> I think this is purely a linux-next build failure.

> I do full allmodconfig builds between each merge I do, and what
> happened is that as part of the LED merge, I removed the
> no-longer-used 'i2c_acpi_find_match_adapter()' to resolve that build
> warning.

> Then linux-next presumably merged my tree with the driver-core tree,
> and that re-instated the use of i2c_acpi_find_match_adapter() - which
> was now gone.

> But when *I* merged the driver-core tree, I did the merge fixup
> correctly to actually re-instate not only the use, but also re-instate
> the removed function that now had a use again.

Yes, that's exactly what happened - it's purely an issue when Greg's
tree is merged automatically, I was reporting the same thing you fixed
up.  If the initial build of your tree had been broken I'd have been
complaining much more loudy and much earlier!

> > Linus, should I submit a fix for this?

> My tree should be fine, and I really think this is just a temporary
> linux-next effect from the above. I think linux-next only handled the
> actual syntactic conflicts, not the semantic conflict of "function had
> been removed to avoid build error from previous merge, and needed to
> be brought back"

Right, git just sees the code moving about and got confused.  Since
you've merged both trees now tomorrow's -next won't do anything for
driver-core and the automation will handle everything fine.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)