Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree

Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-03-12T03:56:02Z

On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 18:50 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 12:51:52AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > After merging the driver-core tree, today's linux-next build ()
> > failed like this on a PowerPC defconfig:
> >
> > HEAD is now at ceb98e684dec Merge remote-tracking branch 'driver-core/driver-core-next'
> > GEN /home/broonie/next/powerpc_ppc64_defconfig/Makefile
> > #
> > # configuration written to .config
> > #
> > /home/broonie/next/next/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-elog.c: In function 'elog_ack_store':
> > /home/broonie/next/next/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-elog.c:84:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'sysfs_schedule_callback' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > sysfs_schedule_callback(&elog_obj->kobj, delay_release_kobj,
> > ^
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > make[3]: *** [arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-elog.o] Error 1
> > make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > /home/broonie/next/next/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-dump.c: In function 'dump_ack_store':
> > /home/broonie/next/next/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-dump.c:100:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'sysfs_schedule_callback' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > sysfs_schedule_callback(&dump_obj->kobj, delay_release_kobj,
> > ^
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> >
> > due to an interaction between d1ba277e7988908 (sysfs, driver-core: remove unused {sysfs|device}_schedule_callback_owner()) and 774fea1a38c6a5a8 (powerpc/powernv: Read OPAL error log and export it through sysfs) from the PowerPC tree.
> >
> > I reverted 774fea1a38c6a5a8 for today.
>
> Sounds like the powerpc tree also needs to stop using this function :)

powerpc -next is a never-rebase branch, so we are somewhat stuffed here.

How do you suggest we proceed ? I can't add a fix to powerpc-next to use
the new function since it doesn't exist upstream yet. I would have to
pull drivers-core-next in which I really don't want to do....

Can the removal of the function be delayed to -rc1 so we can properly
do the fixup ? Or do you have the introduction of the new function in
a topic branch I can pull in without the rest of drivers-core-next ?

Cheers,
Ben.