Hi,
I thought the problem was fixed, but I still see:
arch/powerpc/include/asm/checksum.h:103:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'from64to32'
when building powerpc images (eg powerpc:defconfig).
This is with v4.9.69-20-g78542f2. v4.9.69 fails as well.
Guenter
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:27:41PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Hi,
I thought the problem was fixed, but I still see:
arch/powerpc/include/asm/checksum.h:103:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'from64to32'
when building powerpc images (eg powerpc:defconfig).
This is with v4.9.69-20-g78542f2. v4.9.69 fails as well.
Yeah, I thought I took care of that already too. I'm getting conflicting reports from 0-day about this as well, it failed one build cycle, then passed the next, and now failed again. Ugh, let me try to figure this out...
greg k-h
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:42:25AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:27:41PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Hi,
I thought the problem was fixed, but I still see:
arch/powerpc/include/asm/checksum.h:103:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'from64to32'
when building powerpc images (eg powerpc:defconfig).
This is with v4.9.69-20-g78542f2. v4.9.69 fails as well.
Yeah, I thought I took care of that already too. I'm getting conflicting reports from 0-day about this as well, it failed one build cycle, then passed the next, and now failed again. Ugh, let me try to figure this out...
Ah, it passes powerpc builds on 0-day with the 'allnoconfig' build option, not with the defconfig, that explains that.
greg k-h
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:43:32AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:42:25AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:27:41PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Hi,
I thought the problem was fixed, but I still see:
arch/powerpc/include/asm/checksum.h:103:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'from64to32'
when building powerpc images (eg powerpc:defconfig).
This is with v4.9.69-20-g78542f2. v4.9.69 fails as well.
Yeah, I thought I took care of that already too. I'm getting conflicting reports from 0-day about this as well, it failed one build cycle, then passed the next, and now failed again. Ugh, let me try to figure this out...
Ah, it passes powerpc builds on 0-day with the 'allnoconfig' build option, not with the defconfig, that explains that.
And the patch I tried to apply to fix this up didn't apply in the right place, which is the problem here, let me go fix it now...
thanks for letting me know about this,
greg k-h
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:46:13AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:43:32AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:42:25AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:27:41PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Hi,
I thought the problem was fixed, but I still see:
arch/powerpc/include/asm/checksum.h:103:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'from64to32'
when building powerpc images (eg powerpc:defconfig).
This is with v4.9.69-20-g78542f2. v4.9.69 fails as well.
Yeah, I thought I took care of that already too. I'm getting conflicting reports from 0-day about this as well, it failed one build cycle, then passed the next, and now failed again. Ugh, let me try to figure this out...
Ah, it passes powerpc builds on 0-day with the 'allnoconfig' build option, not with the defconfig, that explains that.
And the patch I tried to apply to fix this up didn't apply in the right place, which is the problem here, let me go fix it now...
thanks for letting me know about this,
Ugh, this was bad. Turns out that for the last release of 4.9 and 4.14, the last 5 or so patches never got applied when I created the git tree. They both stopped at the same place in the patch series, which is odd, but at least it means that they failed in the same way.
This was only caught because this fixup really never made it into the released 4.9 tree. Thanks for this, I'll go reapply the patches that didn't make it into the 4.9 and 4.14 queues.
greg k-h
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:53:38AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:46:13AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:43:32AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 08:42:25AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 02:27:41PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Hi,
I thought the problem was fixed, but I still see:
arch/powerpc/include/asm/checksum.h:103:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'from64to32'
when building powerpc images (eg powerpc:defconfig).
This is with v4.9.69-20-g78542f2. v4.9.69 fails as well.
Yeah, I thought I took care of that already too. I'm getting conflicting reports from 0-day about this as well, it failed one build cycle, then passed the next, and now failed again. Ugh, let me try to figure this out...
Ah, it passes powerpc builds on 0-day with the 'allnoconfig' build option, not with the defconfig, that explains that.
And the patch I tried to apply to fix this up didn't apply in the right place, which is the problem here, let me go fix it now...
thanks for letting me know about this,
Ugh, this was bad. Turns out that for the last release of 4.9 and 4.14, the last 5 or so patches never got applied when I created the git tree. They both stopped at the same place in the patch series, which is odd, but at least it means that they failed in the same way.
And now I know why. They failed on the patch that modified the main kernel Makefile, which makes sense as I hand-edit it to bump the version number, so it was "dirty" and git would complain and stop applying patches there.
I've "semi-scripted" the release process in the past few weeks, so an error like this would not be caught, previously I would have noticed the error as I applied the patches "by hand". I'll go fix up my scripts to not do this, and I'll go verify that I haven't dropped any other patches like this recently either.
thanks,
greg k-h
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Greg Kroah-Hartman -
Guenter Roeck