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: <3d6ea68a-9654-6def-9533-56640ceae69f@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 24 Jun 2021 09:40:08 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To:     Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>,
        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>,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the net-next tree

Hi Marcin,

On 6/24/2021 7:25 AM, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> 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?

As far as I am aware, net and net-next are not rebased so you would need 
to submit a fixup patch against the current net-next with a proper 
Fixes: tag.

Cheers,
Nathan