linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net-next 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPv3WKf6HguRC_2ckau99d4iWG-FV71kn8wiX9r5wuK335EEFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Jun 2021 16:25:57 +0200
From:   Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net-next tree

Hi Stephen,

czw., 24 cze 2021 o 10:54 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> napisał(a):
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:43:14 +0530 Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 at 07:59, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 12:46:48AM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> > > > Hi Stephen,
> > > >
> > > > czw., 24 cze 2021 o 00:29 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> napisał(a):
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Today's linux-next build (x86_64 modules_install) failed like this:
> > > > >
> > > > > depmod: ../tools/depmod.c:1792: depmod_report_cycles_from_root: Assertion `is < stack_size' failed.
> >
> > LKFT test farm found this build error.
> >
> > Regressions found on mips:
> >
> >  - build/gcc-9-malta_defconfig
> >  - build/gcc-10-malta_defconfig
> >  - build/gcc-8-malta_defconfig
> >
> > depmod: ERROR: Cycle detected: fwnode_mdio -> of_mdio -> fwnode_mdio
> > depmod: ERROR: Found 2 modules in dependency cycles!
> > make[1]: *** [/builds/linux/Makefile:1875: modules_install] Error 1
> >
> > > > Thank you for letting us know. Not sure if related, but I just found
> > > > out that this code won't compile for the !CONFIG_FWNODE_MDIO. Below
> > > > one-liner fixes it:
> > > >
> > > > --- a/include/linux/fwnode_mdio.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/fwnode_mdio.h
> > > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static inline int fwnode_mdiobus_register(struct mii_bus *bus,
> > > >          * This way, we don't have to keep compat bits around in drivers.
> > > >          */
> > > >
> > > > -       return mdiobus_register(mdio);
> > > > +       return mdiobus_register(bus);
> > > >  }
> > > >  #endif
> > > >
> > > > I'm curious if this is the case. Tomorrow I'll resubmit with above, so
> > > > I'd appreciate recheck.
> >
> > This proposed fix did not work.
> >
> > > Reverting all the patches in that series fixes the issue for me.
> >
> > Yes.
> > Reverting all the (6) patches in that series fixed this build problem.
> >
> > git log --oneline | head
> > 3752a7bfe73e Revert "Documentation: ACPI: DSD: describe additional MAC
> > configuration"
> > da53528ed548 Revert "net: mdiobus: Introduce fwnode_mdbiobus_register()"
> > 479b72ae8b68 Revert "net/fsl: switch to fwnode_mdiobus_register"
> > 92f85677aff4 Revert "net: mvmdio: add ACPI support"
> > 3d725ff0f271 Revert "net: mvpp2: enable using phylink with ACPI"
> > ffa8c267d44e Revert "net: mvpp2: remove unused 'has_phy' field"
> > d61c8b66c840 Add linux-next specific files for 20210623
>
> So I have reverted the merge of that topic branch from linux-next for
> today.

Just to understand correctly - you reverted merge from the local
branch (I still see the commits on Dave M's net-next/master). I see a
quick solution, but I'm wondering how I should proceed. Submit a
correction patch to the mailing lists against the net-next? Or the
branch is going to be reverted and I should resubmit everything as v4?

Best regards,
Marcin