netdev - Re: [PATCH 8/8] rfkill: Factor common code

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: <CA+A7VXWEp9WAFirRpwpkLheSWv9=XJMfSrgF2LgX7evrYj5aOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:32:13 -0500
From:	João Paulo Rechi Vita <jprvita@...il.com>
To:	kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Cc:	kbuild-all@...org, Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	João Paulo Rechi Vita <jprvita@...lessm.com>,
	linux@...lessm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] rfkill: Factor common code

On 19 January 2016 at 12:39, kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com> wrote:
> Hi João,
>
> [auto build test ERROR on mac80211-next/master]
> [also build test ERROR on v4.4 next-20160119]
> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improving the system]
>
> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Jo-o-Paulo-Rechi-Vita/General-RFKill-improvements/20160119-234934
> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jberg/mac80211-next.git master
> config: i386-randconfig-s0-201603 (attached as .config)
> reproduce:
>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>         make ARCH=i386
>
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
>    net/built-in.o: In function `rfkill_sync_work':
>>> core.c:(.text+0x13d849): undefined reference to `rfkill_get_global_sw_state'
>

I've overlooked the fact that rfkill_get_global_sw_state() is inside a
#ifdef block -- I'll fix this in an updated version.

--
João Paulo Rechi Vita
http://about.me/jprvita