From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for April 1 [BROKEN ubifs when CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y]s Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 00:21:51 +0200 Message-ID: <4D98F2FF.7090201@fusionio.com> References: <20110402112037.ca288d7b.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4D98F1DA.1060203@fusionio.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "sedat.dilek@gmail.com" Cc: Sedat Dilek , Stephen Rothwell , "dedekind1@gmail.com" , "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , LKML List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>>> cc'ing Jens ... >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log: >>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules >>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined! >>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1 >>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2 >>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2 >>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2 >>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory >>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza' >>>>>>>>>> >>> [...] >>>> Just FYI: >>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch. >>>> Adding missing include did not fix the issue. >>>> I am trying with the attached one. >>>> >>>> - Sedat - >>>> >>> >>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error. >>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined >>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/* >>> files. >> >> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus. >> > > I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your > for-linus GIT branch. Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance. Are you using an old for-linus? -- Jens Axboe