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

[Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>]

On 3/16/26 9:02 AM, Nicolas Schier wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 02:18:45PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the kbuild tree, today's linux-next build (arm64 perf)
>> failed like this:
>>
>> Auto-detecting system features:
>> ...                                   libdw: [ on  ]
>> ...                                   glibc: [ on  ]
>> ...                                  libelf: [ on  ]
>> ...                                 libnuma: [ on  ]
>> ...                  numa_num_possible_cpus: [ on  ]
>> ...                               libpython: [ on  ]
>> ...                             libcapstone: [ on  ]
>> ...                               llvm-perf: [ on  ]
>> ...                                    zlib: [ on  ]
>> ...                                    lzma: [ on  ]
>> ...                                     bpf: [ on  ]
>> ...                                  libaio: [ on  ]
>> ...                                 libzstd: [ on  ]
>> ...                              libopenssl: [ on  ]
>> ...                                    rust: [ on  ]
>>
>> Makefile:2254: *** extraneous 'endif'.  Stop.
>> Makefile:2254: *** extraneous 'endif'.  Stop.
>>    PERF_VERSION = .gbc1f864a1976
>> 52.34user 4.91system 0:56.88elapsed 100%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 140840maxresident)k
>> 0inputs+0outputs (0major+1379795minor)pagefaults 0swaps
>> Building: arm64 allnoconfig
>> Makefile:2254: *** extraneous 'endif'.  Stop.
>>
>> Presumably caused by commit
>>
>>    6a76b3c06a1d3 (kbuild: Reduce the number of compiler-generated suffixes for clang thin-lto build)
>>
>> though I don't immediately see how.  I have used the version from
>> next-20260313 instead.
> thanks for the report.  Unfortunately, I cannot reproduce that anyhow;
> but I pushed to kbuild/kbuild-for-next at 12:36 UTC, might that have
> been a bad point in time?  Do you have your merge somewhere around where
> I can fetch it for investigation?

I guess it probably due to my bad suggestions (sorry I should have tested before
sending out).

else
CC_FLAGS_LTO := -flto=thin -fsplit-lto-unit
+if CONFIG_LTO_CLANG_THIN
+KBUILD_LDFLAGS += $(call ld-option,--lto-whole-program-visibility
-mllvm -always-rename-promoted-locals=false)
+endif
endifIt should be else
CC_FLAGS_LTO := -flto=thin -fsplit-lto-unit
+ifdef CONFIG_LTO_CLANG_THIN
+KBUILD_LDFLAGS += $(call ld-option,--lto-whole-program-visibility
-mllvm -always-rename-promoted-locals=false)
+endif
endif

>
> Kind regards,
> Nicolas