linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block 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: <20234840-c9f4-1e68-14f1-57b1ccd1c730@kernel.dk>
Date:   Mon, 11 May 2020 09:28:23 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

On 5/11/20 9:17 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:06:41AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 5/10/20 10:27 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>>
>>> drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c: In function 'aoeblk_gdalloc':
>>> drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c:410:21: error: 'struct backing_dev_info' has no member named 'name'
>>>   410 |  q->backing_dev_info->name = "aoe";
>>>       |                     ^~
>>>
>>> Caused by commit
>>>
>>>   1cd925d58385 ("bdi: remove the name field in struct backing_dev_info")
>>
>> Gah, thanks Stephen. This series is looking less and less impressive,
>> fallout for both 5.7 and 5.8, in terms of build testing (none).
> 
> And the sad part is that it has been sitting out there exposed to the
> buildbot for weeks.  Sigh.

Indeed, I do wish the build bot was a bit more expedient (as in 24h turn
around would be good), and reliable. Seems hit or miss, don't fully trust
it and this series is an example of why.

-- 
Jens Axboe