Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (objtool warning)

2020-04-29 Thread Josh Poimboeuf
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 07:50:10AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 4/29/20 1:33 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Changes since 20200428: > > > > on x86_64: > > kernel/trace/trace_branch.o: warning: objtool: ftrace_likely_update()+0x3c4: > call to __stack_chk_fail() with UACCESS

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2020-04-29 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20200428: The qcom tree still had its build failure for which I reverted a commit. The hwmon-staging tree lost its build failure. The jc_docs tree gained a conflict against the arm64 tree. The mlx5-next tree gained a conflict against the kspp-gustavo tree. The

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Marek Behun
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 20:49:59 +0200 "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" wrote: > On 29.04.19 20:12, Pavel Machek wrote: > > >> Is that controller only built-in into some SoCs, or also available > >> as a separate chip ? > > > > AFAIU.. separate chip, but runs firmware not likely to be

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 29.04.19 20:12, Pavel Machek wrote: >> Is that controller only built-in into some SoCs, or also available >> as a separate chip ? > > AFAIU.. separate chip, but runs firmware not likely to be available > outside Turris routers. hmm, if it's a separate chip, IMHO it should be selectable, so

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Pavel Machek
On Mon 2019-04-29 19:51:40, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 29.04.19 18:53, Pavel Machek wrote: > >>> Theoretically. But we both now that probability of that is very low, > >>> and that likely driver would need other updates, too... right? > >> > >> What would be the benefit to add

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 29.04.19 18:53, Pavel Machek wrote: >>> Theoretically. But we both now that probability of that is very low, >>> and that likely driver would need other updates, too... right? >> >> What would be the benefit to add ARM dependency? So that distro >> compilations don't ship the turris_omnia

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Pavel Machek
On Mon 2019-04-29 18:44:39, Marek Behun wrote: > On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:37:53 +0200 > Pavel Machek wrote: > > > On Mon 2019-04-29 17:38:42, Marek Behun wrote: > > > I am sending patch only adding the I2C dep. Theoretically it is > > > possible that someone uses the same I2C API in their

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Marek Behun
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:37:53 +0200 Pavel Machek wrote: > On Mon 2019-04-29 17:38:42, Marek Behun wrote: > > I am sending patch only adding the I2C dep. Theoretically it is > > possible that someone uses the same I2C API in their microcontroller on > > another architecture. > > Theoretically.

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Pavel Machek
On Mon 2019-04-29 17:38:42, Marek Behun wrote: > I am sending patch only adding the I2C dep. Theoretically it is > possible that someone uses the same I2C API in their microcontroller on > another architecture. Theoretically. But we both now that probability of that is very low, and that likely

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Marek Behun
I am sending patch only adding the I2C dep. Theoretically it is possible that someone uses the same I2C API in their microcontroller on another architecture. On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 17:32:00 +0200 Pavel Machek wrote: > On Mon 2019-04-29 08:03:02, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 4/29/19 2:03 AM, Stephen

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Pavel Machek
On Mon 2019-04-29 08:03:02, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 4/29/19 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Changes since 20190426: > > > > on i386: > > when CONFIG_LEDS_TURRIS_OMNIA=y and CONFIG_I2C=m: > > Probably should also depend on I2C. > > > ld:

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia)

2019-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 4/29/19 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20190426: > on i386: when CONFIG_LEDS_TURRIS_OMNIA=y and CONFIG_I2C=m: Probably should also depend on I2C. ld: drivers/leds/leds-turris-omnia.o: in function `omnia_leds_remove': leds-turris-omnia.c:(.text+0xb):

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2019-04-29 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20190426: The net-next tree gained a conflict against the wireless-drivers tree. The driver-core tree gained a conflict against the block tree. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 9525 9333 files changed, 377625 insertions(+), 167578 deletions(-)

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (btrfs)

2016-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/16 00:13, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20160428: > on i386: fs/built-in.o: In function `scrub_raid56_parity': scrub.c:(.text+0x2d06fb): undefined reference to `__udivdi3' -- ~Randy

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (btrfs)

2016-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/16 00:13, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20160428: > on i386: fs/built-in.o: In function `scrub_raid56_parity': scrub.c:(.text+0x2d06fb): undefined reference to `__udivdi3' -- ~Randy

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2016-04-29 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20160428: The arm64 tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. The pm tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree. The tpmdd tree still had its build failure for which I added a fix patch. The tip tree gained a conflict against the arm64 tree. The xen-tip tree

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2016-04-29 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20160428: The arm64 tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. The pm tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree. The tpmdd tree still had its build failure for which I added a fix patch. The tip tree gained a conflict against the arm64 tree. The xen-tip tree

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2015-04-28 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20150428: Removed tree: arm64-acpi (merged) The drm-intel tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 1043 966 files changed, 68943 insertions(+), 18138 deletions(-)

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2015-04-28 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20150428: Removed tree: arm64-acpi (merged) The drm-intel tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 1043 966 files changed, 68943 insertions(+), 18138 deletions(-)

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2014-04-29 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, This tree still fails (more than usual) the powerpc allyesconfig build. Changes since 20140428: The powerpc tree still had its build failure. The vfs tree gained a conflict against the f2fs tree. The mfd-lj tree still had its build failure so I used the version from next-20140423.

linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2014-04-29 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, This tree still fails (more than usual) the powerpc allyesconfig build. Changes since 20140428: The powerpc tree still had its build failure. The vfs tree gained a conflict against the f2fs tree. The mfd-lj tree still had its build failure so I used the version from next-20140423.

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 13:05, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Changes since 20130426: >> > > > (who is responsible for MEM_SOFT_DIRTY?) > > > on x86_64: > > warning: (HWPOISON_INJECT && MEM_SOFT_DIRTY) selects PROC_PAGE_MONITOR which > has unmet direct

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20130426: > (who is responsible for MEM_SOFT_DIRTY?) on x86_64: warning: (HWPOISON_INJECT && MEM_SOFT_DIRTY) selects PROC_PAGE_MONITOR which has unmet direct dependencies (PROC_FS && MMU) because MEM_SOFT_DIRTY selects

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kconfig)

2013-04-29 Thread Yann E. MORIN
Randy, All, On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 09:25:54AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > make ARCH=x86_64 O=X64 xconfig & > GEN /local/lnx/next/linux-next-20130429/X64/Makefile > HOSTCXX scripts/kconfig/qconf.o > In file included from scripts/kconfig/expr.h:15:0, > from

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (many build errors when PROC_FS is not set -- part 1)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20130426: > Many build errors happen when CONFIG_PROC_FS is not enabled. This is not new -- I also saw it about 2 weeks ago but did not analyze or report it. use of PDE_DATA() (from ):

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Alex Williamson
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 18:46 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 29/04/2013 18:31, Gleb Natapov ha scritto: > >> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': > >> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' undeclared (first use > >> > in this function) > >> > > >> > >

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (sound/soc)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20130426: > on i386: CONFIG_I2C=m sound/built-in.o: In function `snd_soc_codec_set_cache_io': (.text+0x1ebe4): undefined reference to `regmap_init_i2c' make[1]: *** [vmlinux] Error 1 -- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Alex Williamson
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 19:31 +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:52:56AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Changes since 20130426: > > > > > > > > > on x86_64: > > > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Il 29/04/2013 18:31, Gleb Natapov ha scritto: >> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': >> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' undeclared (first use in >> > this function) >> > >> > >> > Oops, CONFIG_PCI is not enabled. > Alex, can you look at this

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (staging/gdm72xx)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20130426: > on x86_64: when CONFIG_MMC=m and CONFIG_WIMAX_GDM72XX_SDIO=y (because it is boolean, not tristate): gdm_sdio.c:(.text+0x147093): undefined reference to `sdio_claim_host' gdm_sdio.c:(.text+0x1470a2): undefined

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Gleb Natapov
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:52:56AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Changes since 20130426: > > > > > on x86_64: > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type'

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kconfig)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20130426: > > make ARCH=x86_64 O=X64 xconfig & GEN /local/lnx/next/linux-next-20130429/X64/Makefile HOSTCXX scripts/kconfig/qconf.o In file included from scripts/kconfig/expr.h:15:0, from

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (include/linux/proc_fs.h: proc_net_mkdir)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20130426: > when CONFIG_PROC_FS is not enabled: CC init/main.o In file included from init/main.c:16:0: include/linux/proc_fs.h: In function 'proc_net_mkdir': include/linux/proc_fs.h:69:2: error: implicit declaration

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20130426: > on x86_64: arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' undeclared (first use in this function) Oops, CONFIG_PCI is not enabled. Full

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: on x86_64: arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' undeclared (first use in this function) Oops, CONFIG_PCI is not enabled. Full

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (include/linux/proc_fs.h: proc_net_mkdir)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: when CONFIG_PROC_FS is not enabled: CC init/main.o In file included from init/main.c:16:0: include/linux/proc_fs.h: In function 'proc_net_mkdir': include/linux/proc_fs.h:69:2: error: implicit declaration of

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kconfig)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: make ARCH=x86_64 O=X64 xconfig GEN /local/lnx/next/linux-next-20130429/X64/Makefile HOSTCXX scripts/kconfig/qconf.o In file included from scripts/kconfig/expr.h:15:0, from

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Gleb Natapov
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:52:56AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: on x86_64: arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' undeclared

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (staging/gdm72xx)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: on x86_64: when CONFIG_MMC=m and CONFIG_WIMAX_GDM72XX_SDIO=y (because it is boolean, not tristate): gdm_sdio.c:(.text+0x147093): undefined reference to `sdio_claim_host' gdm_sdio.c:(.text+0x1470a2): undefined

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Il 29/04/2013 18:31, Gleb Natapov ha scritto: arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' undeclared (first use in this function) Oops, CONFIG_PCI is not enabled. Alex, can you look at this please. Before kvm:

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Alex Williamson
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 19:31 +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:52:56AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: on x86_64: arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension':

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (sound/soc)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: on i386: CONFIG_I2C=m sound/built-in.o: In function `snd_soc_codec_set_cache_io': (.text+0x1ebe4): undefined reference to `regmap_init_i2c' make[1]: *** [vmlinux] Error 1 -- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from this

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kvm)

2013-04-29 Thread Alex Williamson
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 18:46 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: Il 29/04/2013 18:31, Gleb Natapov ha scritto: arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function 'kvm_dev_ioctl_check_extension': arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:2547:22: error: 'pci_bus_type' undeclared (first use in this function) Oops, CONFIG_PCI is

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (many build errors when PROC_FS is not set -- part 1)

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: Many build errors happen when CONFIG_PROC_FS is not enabled. This is not new -- I also saw it about 2 weeks ago but did not analyze or report it. use of PDE_DATA() (from linux/proc_fs.h):

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29 (kconfig)

2013-04-29 Thread Yann E. MORIN
Randy, All, On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 09:25:54AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: make ARCH=x86_64 O=X64 xconfig GEN /local/lnx/next/linux-next-20130429/X64/Makefile HOSTCXX scripts/kconfig/qconf.o In file included from scripts/kconfig/expr.h:15:0, from

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: (who is responsible for MEM_SOFT_DIRTY?) on x86_64: warning: (HWPOISON_INJECT MEM_SOFT_DIRTY) selects PROC_PAGE_MONITOR which has unmet direct dependencies (PROC_FS MMU) because MEM_SOFT_DIRTY selects

Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 29

2013-04-29 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 04/29/13 13:05, Randy Dunlap wrote: On 04/29/13 02:17, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, Changes since 20130426: (who is responsible for MEM_SOFT_DIRTY?) on x86_64: warning: (HWPOISON_INJECT MEM_SOFT_DIRTY) selects PROC_PAGE_MONITOR which has unmet direct dependencies