linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure in final build

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: <fe6609c2-6d22-4167-9373-6636569c3dad@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 23:32:45 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
	Daniel Almeida <daniel.almeida@...labora.com>,
	Deborah Brouwer <deborah.brouwer@...labora.com>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure in final build

On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 11:37:26PM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 11:30 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:

> > at which point I gave up and marked the driver as BROKEN for today, I
> > might take another look tomorrow.

> If they are "just" warnings like the latter ones (i.e. CONFIG_WERROR
> is enabled), then I guess one option is to leave them there for a
> cycle or two, but I don't know that can be easily tracked to avoid
> trees accumulating them... :(

Given that all*config (and x86 defconfig) enable CONFIG_WERROR I don't
think this is sustainable, warnings are fatal as far as -next and
general build coverage are concerned.  The tooling can't tell if a build
failure is generated by -Werror or if it's a standard error.

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