On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 04:03:01PM +0800, Qinglin Pan wrote:
> Hey!
> 
> On 2023/2/9 15:30, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > Hey!
> > 
> > On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 12:00:32PM +0800, Qinglin Pan wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Sorry for bothering :(
> > > 
> > > This patchset has a bit of a formatting problem.
> > > Please use another one:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20230209035343.15282-1-panqinglin00@gmail.com/T/#t
> > 
> > If you're resending, please either mark as RESEND or increment the
> > version number so that tools don't get confused.
> > In this case though, tools found some issues with both version
> > unfortunately:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-riscv/patch/20230209035343.15282-2-panqinglin00@gmail.com/
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-riscv/patch/20230209035343.15282-3-panqinglin00@gmail.com/
> > (if you click on the descriptions you should get more information on
> > what is wrong)
> > 
> > You can fix those up and send a v13 and it'll all be clear then ;)
> 
> Your information is very helpful, thanks so much!
> 
> I will send a v13 later. But I am very curious about why
> conchuod/alphanumeric_selects is failed and what content is in
> this test? Could you please give me some hints about it? ;)

Oh yeah, that output is not very helpful is it. It runs a perl script
that RMK created that tries to put things in the "correct" order before
and after the patch is applied. The script is here:
https://github.com/ConchuOD/nipa/blob/main/tests_rv/patch/alphanumeric_selects/alphanumeric_selects.pl
It also re-orders default/depends on strings, and I assume it's being
tripped up by the config option that you are adding not doing what it
wants you to do with the order of those.
I think you can ignore that one for now.

It's the build errors and SoB issues that I am more interested in
getting fixed ;)

I'll go convert the error level of that to a warning & try to fix up the
reporting that it does.

Cheers,
Conor.