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

Date:   Wed, 18 Aug 2021 12:41:57 +0100
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
CC:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Next Mailing List" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the scsi-mkp tree

On 18/08/2021 04:07, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 8/17/21 2:51 AM, John Garry wrote:
>> sorry... I only built x86 and arm64 allmodconfig. Let me check this.
> Build testing for tree-wide changes is tricky. You may want to use a
> build bot for such testing. From
> https://01.org/lkp/documentation/0-day-test-service:
> 
> Q: Which git tree and which mailing list will be tested? How can I
> opt-in or opt-out from it?
> 
> A: 0-Day monitors hundreds of git trees and tens of mailing lists. You
> can obtain detailed tree and mailing list information from the source
> code under the lkp-tests/repo directory. If you want to add or remove
> your tree from the 0-Day test system, send an email to the LKML,
> specifying your git tree URL.

Thanks for the info! Quite useful.

Unfortunately there is code which has internal build switches - like 
qla1280.c and DEBUG_QLA1280, which Martin mentioned - so harder to spot. 
I suppose that's the risk with internal build switches.

Thanks again,
John