From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758150AbYDHCI5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Apr 2008 22:08:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752987AbYDHCIu (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Apr 2008 22:08:50 -0400 Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.46.31]:26067 "EHLO yw-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751519AbYDHCIt (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Apr 2008 22:08:49 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=jUwEl4gqyepy0chUdgbLv+IpGwblT2D0kgfv5P2c1XnUBoZUUe8137Ok4kO0btblMYT9msP+hpN18r6bpAGKRUg4dO0+jtisJzIHvkAVRNFzMjQxhO+UJjRkfrxfU4pKAnVlbzrCJ8IJzQZZX8xD5YeP4k4NsOn9WXVmvqy6Jls= Message-ID: <386072610804071908w5e4c6719m166c5b84d965a24c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 10:08:48 +0800 From: "Bryan Wu" To: "Jeff Garzik" Subject: Re: Blackfin STAMP537 compiling error in 2.6.25-rc8 Cc: "Linus Torvalds" , "Andrew Morton" , "David Miller" , LKML , magnus.damm@gmail.com, damm@igel.co.jp, lethal@linux-sh.org, nico@cam.org, "Mike Frysinger" In-Reply-To: <47FA813D.6090505@garzik.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <386072610804070057w1eb65db5taeca77f8f3e36627@mail.gmail.com> <47F9D7BA.6080708@garzik.org> <386072610804070115s57dfd49fgad01218e820167b@mail.gmail.com> <47FA813D.6090505@garzik.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: b6a778d332f1d517 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 4:17 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Bryan Wu wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:13 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > > > Bryan Wu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > We found the latest kernel compile failed with Blackfin STAMP537 > > > > configuration on our daily build machine. > > > > --- > > > > CC drivers/net/smc91x.o > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c: In function 'smc_rcv': > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c:513: warning: passing argument 1 of 'insw' makes > > > > integer from pointer without a cast > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c: In function 'smc_hardware_send_pkt': > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c:620: warning: passing argument 1 of 'outsw' makes > > > > integer from pointer without a cast > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c:1859:32: error: macro "SMC_GET_MAC_ADDR" requires > > > > 2 arguments, but only 1 given > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c: In function 'smc_probe': > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c:1859: error: 'SMC_GET_MAC_ADDR' undeclared (first > > > > use in this function) > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c:1859: error: (Each undeclared identifier is > > > > reported only once > > > > drivers/net/smc91x.c:1859: error: for each function it appears in.) > > > > make[2]: *** [drivers/net/smc91x.o] Error 1 > > > > make[1]: *** [drivers/net] Error 2 > > > > make: *** [drivers] Error 2 > > > > --- > > > > > > > > That is because my -mm tree fixing bug patch: > > > > > > > > > > > > (http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=9e6db60825ef7e7999abc610ce256ba768e58162) > > > > > > > was merged into mainline before the smc91x API change patch in -mm: > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.25-rc5/2.6.25-rc5-mm1/broken-out/smc91x-pass-along-private-data-v2.patch > > > > > > > Did I miss something here? or this patch is on the way before 2.6.25 > > > > final release? > > > > > > > > > > > It looks like I missed something... I thought akpm was going to send > the > > > patch for -mm in? > > > > > > If not, let's revert this one... > > > > > > > > > > ok, no problem, it is ok for me. > > > > Cool. > > David or Linus, please revert 9e6db60825ef7e7999abc610ce256ba768e58162 > > It was merged without the API it needed, causing build breakage. > > Acked-by: Jeff Garzik > > Thanks a lot. > > Andrew, > > Since it was an arch patch to a driver I cannot build, I made the > [mistaken] assumption that your sending it to me was an indication that it > should actually be merged :) Especially with a subject like "fix build > breakage", for a platform I cannot easily build... > > Are there any process tweaks that could be made here? Maybe -mm stuff sent > to maintainers could be tagged, noting dependencies on other -mm patches > that are not yet upstream? > Oh, IMO, this confusing is initially introduced by me. I should choose more meaningful name of this patch. such as smc91x-pass-along-private-data-v2-fix-build-fail-on-blackfin.patch. Then things become more clear for everyone. -Bryan