linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: [ !! PROPOSAL !! ] NMI & register handling infrastructure
Next: v4l: Pushdown bkl to drivers that implement their own ioctl
From: Greg KH on 18 May 2010 17:30 On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:58:33PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Greg this fixes the conflict with the vfs tree we see in linux-next. Thanks, I can apply this to my tree right now, right? greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Greg KH on 18 May 2010 17:30 On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 02:06:07PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > * Greg KH (greg(a)kroah.com) wrote: > > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 04:44:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > After merging the driver-core tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > > > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this: > > > > > > cc1: warnings being treated as errors > > > In file included from include/linux/kobject.h:21, > > > from include/linux/device.h:17, > > > from arch/powerpc/lib/devres.c:10: > > > include/linux/sysfs.h:97: error: 'struct file' declared inside parameter list > > > include/linux/sysfs.h:97: error: its scope is only this definition or declaration, which is probably not what you want > > > include/linux/sysfs.h:99: error: 'struct file' declared inside parameter list > > > include/linux/sysfs.h:101: error: 'struct file' declared inside parameter list > > > > > > and many more (arch/powerpc is built with -Werror (as do some other > > > architectures)) and lots of similar warnings ... > > > > > > Caused by commit f8e898186196a22756b50b908ecd92123265f8a2 ("sysfs: add > > > struct file* to bin_attr callbacks"). See Rule 1 in > > > Documentation/SubmitChecklist. The header file probably just needs > > > "struct file;" added in the right place. > > > > > > I have reverted that commit for today (and commit > > > 44e425ab9f887ec6d3a7a4481f3b0c99f120de19 ("pci: check caps from sysfs > > > file open to read device dependent config space") that depends on it). > > > > Ick. > > > > Chris, care to send a patch to resolve this? > > Would you prefer incremental to fold in, or respin? It's just this > one-liner fwd declaration as Stephen mentioned. Incremental to fold in is easier. That way there's no build error in the tree. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Eric W. Biederman on 18 May 2010 18:00
Greg KH <greg(a)kroah.com> writes: > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:58:33PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Greg this fixes the conflict with the vfs tree we see in linux-next. > > Thanks, I can apply this to my tree right now, right? Yes it is safe to apply to your tree right now. Apologies if that wasn't clear. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |