From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: linux-next: suspend tree build failure Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:40:50 +0200 Message-ID: <200908190040.50949.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <20090818183049.8bde1ee6.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <200908182343.32375.rjw@sisk.pl> <20090818221301.GA20676@linux-sh.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:56155 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751658AbZHRWkG (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:40:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090818221301.GA20676@linux-sh.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Paul Mundt Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 19 August 2009, Paul Mundt wrote: > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:43:32PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Tuesday 18 August 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi Rafael, > > > > Hi, > > > > > Today's linux-next build (i386 defconfig) failed like this: > > > > > > drivers/base/power/main.c: In function 'device_pm_init': > > > drivers/base/power/main.c:59: error: 'struct dev_pm_info' has no member named 'lock' > > > > Argh, that line shouldn't even be there. > > > > > Caused by commit ea8e84f27325d9ddc7692f728a10e0a22cd59f52 ("PM: Introduce > > > core framework for run-time PM of I/O devices (rev. 17)") from the > > > suspend tree. The i386 defconfig does not have CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME set but > > > does have CONFIG_PM_SLEEP=y ... > > > > > > I have reverted that commit for today. > > > > > > When you add a new CONFIG variable, it is worth doing test builds both > > > with it turned on and turned off ... > > > > I tested it, but I broke the patch afterwards by mistake. :-( > > > > Sorry for the trouble, I've just pushed an updated tree. > > > Argh, and rebased in the process, again. This is now the second time in > as many days this has been rebased, meaning I have to throw away my topic > branch and re-create. I thought this was going to remain stable? I would > like the SH runtime PM code to get some coverage in -next, but I can't > merge it in to my tree if the suspend tree keeps rebasing every day. Well, my linux-next branch is not to guaranteed to be stable, just like the entire linux-next tree. Once the patch stops making trouble, I'll move it into my for-linus branch, which _is_ guaranteed not to be rebased (in fact it's never rebased). I haven't done it yet exactly because of these build problems. Please wait for a couple of days more for things to settle down. Best, Rafael