Re: [sj:mm-new 42/45] ERROR: modpost: __ex_table+0x1584 references non-executable section '.rodata.spk_ttyio_synth_probe.str1.4'

[Philip Li <philip.li@intel.com>]

On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 10:51:38PM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote:
> On Wed,  6 Aug 2025 22:43:49 -0700 SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 7 Aug 2025 06:31:25 +0100 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > +cc SJ, as his tree :)
> > 
> > Thank you, Lorenzo!
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 12:03:03PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > > tree:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sj/linux.git mm-new
> > > 
> > > Not sure why SJ isn't cc'd when it's his tree?
> > > 
> > > Not sure how easy it would be for the scripts to figure this out.
> > 
> > As people might already realized, it is Andrew's mm-new branch.  I started
> > pushing Andrew's mm-{new,unstable,stable} branches to my tree for backup
> > purpose, since DAMON development branch (damon/next) is using mm-new as its
> > baseline.  Seems it caused confusion to kernel test robot and other people.
> > Sorry about that.
> > 
> > kernel test robot, is there a way to mark mm-{new,unstable,stable} branches on
> > my tree be ignored from your tests?  If there is no good way, I can remove the
> > branches from my tree.
> 
> To stop more confusion first rather than waiting for the answer, I just deleted
> the mm-{new,unstable,stable} branches from my tree.  I don't really depend on
> those branches on my tree since I can keep fetching Andrew's tree or using my
> trees outside of kernel.org.  So this is no problem for me.
> 
> kernel test robot, please let me know if there is a way to mark specific
> branches on my tree be ignored from your tests, though, if you get a time and
> have an idea.

Yes, the test bot supports this to ignore branches by pattern, for example,

	branch_denylist: .*-wip|.*-v[0-9]*|.*-[0-9]*
	branch_denylist: mirror/.*

Do you want to just ignore mm-{new,unstable,stable} branches, I can configure the
repo to handle this?

Thanks

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> SJ
> 
> [...]
>