From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEC4022756A; Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:27:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.15 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738837648; cv=none; b=XFr1orihEEpQQ+b/Uhtnmn1KZm0VHkL4sXEXNaWcOGFSeiND7p853wWHQDGAFbhTF+IMoVenh6mzhx4/dpUFGJGFIOvmgUlAAc5ldEOEf2nwkQjM7LztQ6BiFN/rw4nwIMHVdyWUML9OAjc3kekK8W5nbjyqTfxO5rTS04L7sFE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738837648; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jYnY+PAbF/WN3ltzf1lZC2RXNGS9Qd9KAU85uNCx1FM=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=JXpw2LEIYcwZmNQynEyPn2OlEPq+LnOfTlqHoWmEkCu2VmmDU44CECBM8XnQc+fcyEJ1x5XyCs9nVBY44FsgiyJZtXas463qkysaK5kvUM9iVXdktaImO193nshmvvFeA3p3PiqmZBXW2wGjDqoYF6qY7egi91vo+Jo3rDnc8rU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=PPK2bkKS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.15 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="PPK2bkKS" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1738837646; x=1770373646; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=jYnY+PAbF/WN3ltzf1lZC2RXNGS9Qd9KAU85uNCx1FM=; b=PPK2bkKSHXfsTiYvIRwaozmuXRo+kpg6lHf7pXLkF0/6B5gsA9z1ApKf h9o6QawchFSGRHZwPAMFxtDbXZbOgs1Hb8CpgAYhfZ/ZrIiXw5fCHwJBr ZIjTmzSI9J24pjwM/VGUxqbCgxJ6lsKZtztmHw4aPUa1gp0Ny6ep17ley 4Ka2hCr5UBlwEf8zzyYrx16JybzQH/tgwStMfxRgVFmt6wisb9+LLGwtS hJAM2PlUOHplVpQtSHCpSDR9d7wwXiJlgJoToAOjDvaARHiu+Rojt3OxB hwIpxbpu38l2B/IOxuVUiKFyXaZpViB8zGSJInPLny/hQHeooeizlWpq1 g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: S5LJmuFITLG+msb7EpVKww== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +s9rN1FrT6u4O5LT0D+TFw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11336"; a="39590329" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,264,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="39590329" Received: from orviesa001.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.141]) by fmvoesa109.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2025 02:27:26 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: fqpyoR3eQFaADrXPEAeHfg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: lrzwzj51Qx+4JmKGj2eZnA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,224,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="148378342" Received: from ijarvine-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.165]) by smtpauth.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2025 02:27:23 -0800 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 12:27:19 +0200 (EET) To: Stephen Rothwell cc: Hans de Goede , Mark Gross , Joshua Grisham , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the drivers-x86 tree In-Reply-To: <20250206133652.71bbf1d3@canb.auug.org.au> Message-ID: <3603e5e3-b8f9-54eb-c181-03cf2679cb7f@linux.intel.com> References: <20250206133652.71bbf1d3@canb.auug.org.au> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 6 Feb 2025, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > After merging the drivers-x86 tree, today's linux-next build > (x86_64_allmodconfig) failed like this: > > In file included from include/linux/kobject.h:20, > from include/linux/energy_model.h:7, > from include/linux/device.h:16, > from include/linux/acpi.h:14, > from drivers/platform/x86/samsung-galaxybook.c:14: > drivers/platform/x86/samsung-galaxybook.c: In function 'galaxybook_fw_attr_init': > drivers/platform/x86/samsung-galaxybook.c:1014:33: error: 'fw_attr' is a pointer; did you mean to use '->'? > 1014 | sysfs_attr_init(&fw_attr.display_name); > | ^ > include/linux/sysfs.h:55:10: note: in definition of macro 'sysfs_attr_init' > 55 | (attr)->key = &__key; \ > | ^~~~ > drivers/platform/x86/samsung-galaxybook.c:1020:33: error: 'fw_attr' is a pointer; did you mean to use '->'? > 1020 | sysfs_attr_init(&fw_attr.current_value); > | ^ > include/linux/sysfs.h:55:10: note: in definition of macro 'sysfs_attr_init' > 55 | (attr)->key = &__key; \ > | ^~~~ > > Caused by commit > > f97634611408 ("platform/x86: samsung-galaxybook: Add samsung-galaxybook driver") > > I guess this was never built with CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC set. > > I have used the drivers-x86 tree from next-20250205 for today. Apparently it wasn't. However, I've an LKP success report for f97634611408 (prior to pushing it to for-next, I always wait for LKP). Why LKP didn't catch it despite claiming it built with x86_64_allyesconfig (successfully)?? Did LKP not build the tree?? I've pulled the commit from for-next until the problem is resolved to not keep breaking builds. Joshua, could you please take a look at it. -- i.