From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Whitehouse Subject: Re: linux-next: gfs2 tree build failure Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:48:41 +0100 Message-ID: <1214560121.3469.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080627151225.1fe44918.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:43410 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751573AbYF0Juj (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2008 05:50:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080627151225.1fe44918.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 15:12 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Steven, > > Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this: > > ERROR: "gdlm_release_all_locks" [fs/gfs2/locking/dlm/lock_dlm.ko] undefined! > > Commit 98ea8e79ff4dfa804690831248881fa6b2145978 ("[GFS2] Remove all_list > from lock_dlm") missed one call site of the gdlm_release_all_locks > function which it removed. It also neglected to remove the declaration > of that function from fs/gfs2/locking/dlm/lock_dlm.h. I have reverted > that commit. > > Sorry, Steven, but I don't see how that could have been build tested ... > please take a little more care. > Sorry. I've just pushed a fix to that. I'm not sure how that slipped through other than to say that it did build (I just tried it) so that is why it wasn't spotted, Steve.