linux-next: Tree for Sep 24

linux-next: Tree for Sep 24

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1669 bytes --]

Hi all,

There will be no -next releases Tuesday and Wednesday next week, and
it's possible I might run out of time on Monday.

Changes since 20250923:

The vfs tree gained multiple conflicts with the vfs-brauner tree.

The fs-next tree gained a conflict with the mm-stable tree.

The net tree gained a conflit with the net-next tree.

The bpf-next tree gained a conflict with the net-next tree.

Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 10946
 11023 files changed, 529132 insertions(+), 204086 deletions(-)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have created today's linux-next tree at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
(patches at http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/next/ ).  If you
are tracking the linux-next tree using git, you should not use "git pull"
to do so as that will try to merge the new linux-next release with the
old one.  You should use "git fetch" and checkout or reset to the new
master.

You can see which trees have been included by looking in the Next/Trees
file in the source.  There is also the merge.log file in the Next
directory.  Between each merge, the tree was built with an arm64
defconfig, an allmodconfig for x86_64, a multi_v7_defconfig for arm and
a native build of tools/perf.

Below is a summary of the state of the merge.

I am currently merging 407 trees (counting Linus' and 406 trees of bug
fix patches pending for the current release).

Stats about the size of the tree over time can be seen at
http://neuling.org/linux-next-size.html .

Thanks to Randy Dunlap for doing many randconfig builds.  And to Paul
Gortmaker for triage and bug fixes.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 24 (htmldocs / pdfdocs)

[Randy Dunlap]

On 9/24/25 7:41 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> There will be no -next releases Tuesday and Wednesday next week, and
> it's possible I might run out of time on Monday.
> 

When I run 'make O=DOCS htmldocs', I see these warning messages:

../Documentation/Makefile:70: warning: overriding recipe for target 'pdfdocs'
../Documentation/Makefile:61: warning: ignoring old recipe for target 'pdfdocs'


Is this a known issue?

I have seen these warning messages for several days recently.

-- 
~Randy

Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 24 (htmldocs / pdfdocs)

[Akira Yokosawa]

Hi Randy,

On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 10:54:18 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 9/24/25 7:41 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> There will be no -next releases Tuesday and Wednesday next week, and
>> it's possible I might run out of time on Monday.
>> 
> 
> When I run 'make O=DOCS htmldocs', I see these warning messages:
> 
> ../Documentation/Makefile:70: warning: overriding recipe for target 'pdfdocs'
> ../Documentation/Makefile:61: warning: ignoring old recipe for target 'pdfdocs'
> 
> 
> Is this a known issue?

I could reproduce these warnings under containers who have minimal
packages needed for htmldocs *only*.

Current "docs-mw" branch doesn't show them.  "build-scripts" is the
one who carries this harmless regression.

By "harmless", I mean "pdfdocs" needs texlive packages anyway.

HTH,

Akira

Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 24 (htmldocs / pdfdocs)

[Randy Dunlap]

Hi Akira,

On 9/25/25 7:15 AM, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> Hi Randy,
> 
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 10:54:18 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 9/24/25 7:41 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> There will be no -next releases Tuesday and Wednesday next week, and
>>> it's possible I might run out of time on Monday.
>>>
>>
>> When I run 'make O=DOCS htmldocs', I see these warning messages:
>>
>> ../Documentation/Makefile:70: warning: overriding recipe for target 'pdfdocs'
>> ../Documentation/Makefile:61: warning: ignoring old recipe for target 'pdfdocs'
>>
>>
>> Is this a known issue?
> 
> I could reproduce these warnings under containers who have minimal
> packages needed for htmldocs *only*.
> 
> Current "docs-mw" branch doesn't show them.  "build-scripts" is the
> one who carries this harmless regression.
> 
> By "harmless", I mean "pdfdocs" needs texlive packages anyway.


Right, I don't have any texlive (or latex or tetex) packages installed.
I shouldn't need to since I am not building any pdfdocs, so I
shouldn't get these warning messages. But if they go away in the near
future, that's great.

Thanks.

-- 
~Randy

Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 24 (htmldocs / pdfdocs)

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em Thu, 25 Sep 2025 09:59:45 -0700
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> escreveu:

> Hi Akira,
> 
> On 9/25/25 7:15 AM, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> > Hi Randy,
> > 
> > On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 10:54:18 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:  
> >> On 9/24/25 7:41 AM, Mark Brown wrote:  
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> There will be no -next releases Tuesday and Wednesday next week, and
> >>> it's possible I might run out of time on Monday.
> >>>  
> >>
> >> When I run 'make O=DOCS htmldocs', I see these warning messages:
> >>
> >> ../Documentation/Makefile:70: warning: overriding recipe for target 'pdfdocs'
> >> ../Documentation/Makefile:61: warning: ignoring old recipe for target 'pdfdocs'
> >>
> >>
> >> Is this a known issue?  
> > 
> > I could reproduce these warnings under containers who have minimal
> > packages needed for htmldocs *only*.
> > 
> > Current "docs-mw" branch doesn't show them.  "build-scripts" is the
> > one who carries this harmless regression.
> > 
> > By "harmless", I mean "pdfdocs" needs texlive packages anyway.  
> 
> 
> Right, I don't have any texlive (or latex or tetex) packages installed.
> I shouldn't need to since I am not building any pdfdocs, so I
> shouldn't get these warning messages. But if they go away in the near
> future, that's great.

Just sent the fixes. They are because I forgot to do another cleanup
at docs Makefile and didn't test on an environment without latex.

Fix is trivial: just drop the second (unneeded) pdfdocs target.


Thanks,
Mauro