From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anna Schumaker Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfs-anna tree Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 10:34:47 -0500 Message-ID: <33a779e0263e28976ce14cd8c1406851134cfec9.camel@gmail.com> References: <20181217101630.292dd55e@canb.auug.org.au> <809c5ec8-0763-6855-bbbc-3cb95e168278@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <809c5ec8-0763-6855-bbbc-3cb95e168278@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Rasmus Villemoes , Stephen Rothwell , Trond Myklebust , NFS Mailing List Cc: Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 12:18 +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 17/12/2018 00.16, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm > > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this: > > > > /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c: In function 'root_nfs_data': > > /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c:264:5: error: implicit declaration of > > function 'fmtcheck'; did you mean 'dst_check'? [-Werror=implicit-function- > > declaration] > > fmtcheck(tmp, "%s", 0), utsname()->nodename); > > ^~~~~~~~ > > dst_check > > > > Caused by commit > > > > 66ab6f062d96 ("nfs: use fmtcheck() in root_nfs_data") > > I didn't know anybody had picked that one up. It's completely safe to > just ignore that commit until the fmtcheck() utility is actually in. > > Anna, can I take the fact that this was picked up as a sort-of implicit > ack, that I can use if and when I ever get around to resending the > fmtcheck() series? And for simplicitly, would you mind if the nfs patch > would just be routed along with the patches introducing fmtcheck()? Sure that sounds good. I'll remove it from my tree for now. > > Rasmus > >