linux-next: build failure after merge of the fixes tree

linux-next: build failure after merge of the fixes tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 810 bytes --]

Hi all,

Today's build of Linus' tree (arm64 defconfig) failed like this:

In file included from /tmp/next/build/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/axis/artpec8-grizzly.dts:12:
/tmp/next/build/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/axis/artpec8.dtsi:12:10: fatal error: dt-bindings/clock/axis,artpec8-clk.h: No such file or directory
   12 | #include <dt-bindings/clock/axis,artpec8-clk.h>
      |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compilation terminated.
make[5]: *** [/tmp/next/build/scripts/Makefile.dtbs:132: arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/axis/artpec8-grizzly.dtb] Error 1

Caused by commit

   b176376991772 ("arm64: dts: axis: Add ARTPEC-8 Grizzly dts support")

I have reverted that commit for today and also

   639f8e36baf1c ("arm64: dts: exynos: axis: Add initial ARTPEC-8 SoC support")

which depends on it.

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

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

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2025 at 20:01, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's build of Linus' tree (arm64 defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from /tmp/next/build/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/axis/artpec8-grizzly.dts:12:
> /tmp/next/build/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/axis/artpec8.dtsi:12:10: fatal error: dt-bindings/clock/axis,artpec8-clk.h: No such file or directory
>    12 | #include <dt-bindings/clock/axis,artpec8-clk.h>
>       |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> compilation terminated.
> make[5]: *** [/tmp/next/build/scripts/Makefile.dtbs:132: arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/axis/artpec8-grizzly.dtb] Error 1
>
> Caused by commit
>
>    b176376991772 ("arm64: dts: axis: Add ARTPEC-8 Grizzly dts support")

 Thanks for the report, I already got message from Linus about it.

This will be "fixed" (not bisectable...)  by clk pull from Stephen.

I'll try to add some more tests for such cases to my CI (because
Samsung won't... ), but it's already a very busy machine. What I
wonder is that this branch was in next for two months and LKP didn't
catch it. Maybe Intel LKP cannot be fully relied on anymore?

It seems it's second missing allmodconfig from LKP this cycle (another
build failure reported by Linus for other pull request).