From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: linux-next: libata/avr32 build failure Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:50:59 -0400 Message-ID: <47F694B3.5000002@garzik.org> References: <20080404171040.d3d64c2d.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <47F5E1A0.4060905@garzik.org> <20080404095408.88a92c7c.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <47F67766.6030903@garzik.org> <47F6796A.7040905@oracle.com> <47F68E59.9090205@garzik.org> <20080404133931.482d8614.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:35997 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751007AbYDDUvI (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:51:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080404133931.482d8614.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Haavard Skinnemoen , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:23:53 -0400 Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> Randy Dunlap wrote: >>> Jeff Garzik wrote: >>>> Randy Dunlap wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 04:06:56 -0400 Jeff Garzik wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Jeff, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For a while the linux-next build for avr32 defconfig (and others) has >>>>>>> been failing like this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> drivers/ata/libata-core.c:127: error: 'ata_pci_default_filter' >>>>>>> undeclared here (not in a function) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It seems to be because the declaration of ata_pci_default_filter is >>>>>>> protected by CONFIG_PCI but the usage above is protected by CONFIG_ATA >>>>>>> only. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also reported by Randy Dunlap (on March 26) and Haavard Skinnemoen (on >>>>>>> March 29). >>>>>> fixed being pushed right now (patch from Tejun fixed it) >>>>> Some fixes other than what was in today's (April 04) >>>>> [git patches] libata fixes? >>>>> >>>>> I hope there is more. I don't see how that fixes this error. >>>>> Nor does gcc see how, after I apply that patch. >>>> It wasn't sent in #upstream-fixes, it was applied to #upstream... >>>> >>>> Is that where you are looking? >>> I'm just trying to build linux-next with or without today's "libata fixes". >>> ATA with CONFIG_PCI=n still has build errors, as reported above. >> OK, that's expected. > > Uh, that's not good. What does it mean? > > (a) linux-next is not pulling the correct branch of your git tree > or > (b) linux-next just won't work with libata > or > (c) we have too many trees in the forest > or > something else? (if so, what?) It means you are inside the window between unfixed linux-next and tomorrow's fixed linux-next, and that you attempted to seek the proper fix in the wrong location. So the next time linux-next pulls from libata, it should be fixed. Or, if you don't want to wait, you should get the fix from the location noted (#upstream branch), because the fix was not among those sent to Linus yesterday. Jeff