All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Future of liblockdep
@ 2017-05-03 20:13 Ben Hutchings
  2017-05-03 21:00 ` alexander.levin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ben Hutchings @ 2017-05-03 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sasha Levin, Ingo Molnar; +Cc: LKML

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 644 bytes --]

liblockdep hasn't been buildable since (I think) Linux 4.6.  I sent
Sasha fixes for that last June and he included these in a pull request
to Ingo, but somehow they never reached mainline.  Linux 4.8 broke
liblockdep further, and I gave up packaging it for Debian.

There have been no other changes to liblockdep since then, other than a
general change in the tools/ directory.  Sasha's address in MAINTAINERS
is also out-of-date.

Please either maintain liblockdep properly or delete it.  We shouldn't
keep code in the tree in a broken state.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
friends: People who know you well, but like you anyway.


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Future of liblockdep
  2017-05-03 20:13 Future of liblockdep Ben Hutchings
@ 2017-05-03 21:00 ` alexander.levin
  2017-05-03 21:19   ` Ben Hutchings
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: alexander.levin @ 2017-05-03 21:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, LKML

On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:13:57PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> liblockdep hasn't been buildable since (I think) Linux 4.6.  I sent
> Sasha fixes for that last June and he included these in a pull request
> to Ingo, but somehow they never reached mainline.  Linux 4.8 broke
> liblockdep further, and I gave up packaging it for Debian.
> 
> There have been no other changes to liblockdep since then, other than a
> general change in the tools/ directory.  Sasha's address in MAINTAINERS
> is also out-of-date.
> 
> Please either maintain liblockdep properly or delete it.  We shouldn't
> keep code in the tree in a broken state.

Hi Ben,

I indeed received those patches and forwarded them on:

	https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/17/1044

As well as an updated maintainers entry:

	https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/29/431

But I failed to follow up on that and it seems to have fallen through the
cracks.

I'll get it back into shape, sorry.

I also don't expect many changes to liblockdep other than keeping it buildable,
if there are any missing features or bugs you'd like to discuss I'd be happy to
look into those.

-- 

Thanks,
Sasha

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Future of liblockdep
  2017-05-03 21:00 ` alexander.levin
@ 2017-05-03 21:19   ` Ben Hutchings
  2017-05-04  3:42     ` alexander.levin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ben Hutchings @ 2017-05-03 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: alexander.levin; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, LKML

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1737 bytes --]

On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 21:00 +0000, alexander.levin@verizon.com wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:13:57PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > liblockdep hasn't been buildable since (I think) Linux 4.6.  I sent
> > Sasha fixes for that last June and he included these in a pull request
> > to Ingo, but somehow they never reached mainline.  Linux 4.8 broke
> > liblockdep further, and I gave up packaging it for Debian.
> > 
> > There have been no other changes to liblockdep since then, other than a
> > general change in the tools/ directory.  Sasha's address in MAINTAINERS
> > is also out-of-date.
> > 
> > Please either maintain liblockdep properly or delete it.  We shouldn't
> > keep code in the tree in a broken state.
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
> I indeed received those patches and forwarded them on:
> 
> 	https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/17/1044
> 
> As well as an updated maintainers entry:
> 
> 	https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/29/431
> 
> But I failed to follow up on that and it seems to have fallen through the
> cracks.
> 
> I'll get it back into shape, sorry.
> 
> I also don't expect many changes to liblockdep other than keeping it buildable,
> if there are any missing features or bugs you'd like to discuss I'd be happy to
> look into those.

I had some other fixes that I was waiting to send:

https://sources.debian.net/src/linux/4.9.25-1/debian/patches/bugfix/all/lockdep-fix-oot-build.patch/
https://sources.debian.net/src/linux/4.9.25-1/debian/patches/bugfix/all/lockdep-fix-soname.patch/
https://sources.debian.net/src/linux/4.9.25-1/debian/patches/bugfix/all/tools-lib-lockdep-use-ldflags.patch/

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
friends: People who know you well, but like you anyway.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: Future of liblockdep
  2017-05-03 21:19   ` Ben Hutchings
@ 2017-05-04  3:42     ` alexander.levin
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: alexander.levin @ 2017-05-04  3:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: Ingo Molnar, LKML

On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 10:19:55PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 21:00 +0000, alexander.levin@verizon.com wrote:
> > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:13:57PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > liblockdep hasn't been buildable since (I think) Linux 4.6.  I sent
> > > Sasha fixes for that last June and he included these in a pull request
> > > to Ingo, but somehow they never reached mainline.  Linux 4.8 broke
> > > liblockdep further, and I gave up packaging it for Debian.
> > > 
> > > There have been no other changes to liblockdep since then, other than a
> > > general change in the tools/ directory.  Sasha's address in MAINTAINERS
> > > is also out-of-date.
> > > 
> > > Please either maintain liblockdep properly or delete it.  We shouldn't
> > > keep code in the tree in a broken state.
> > 
> > Hi Ben,
> > 
> > I indeed received those patches and forwarded them on:
> > 
> > 	https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/17/1044
> > 
> > As well as an updated maintainers entry:
> > 
> > 	https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/7/29/431
> > 
> > But I failed to follow up on that and it seems to have fallen through the
> > cracks.
> > 
> > I'll get it back into shape, sorry.
> > 
> > I also don't expect many changes to liblockdep other than keeping it buildable,
> > if there are any missing features or bugs you'd like to discuss I'd be happy to
> > look into those.
> 
> I had some other fixes that I was waiting to send:
> 
> https://sources.debian.net/src/linux/4.9.25-1/debian/patches/bugfix/all/lockdep-fix-oot-build.patch/
> https://sources.debian.net/src/linux/4.9.25-1/debian/patches/bugfix/all/lockdep-fix-soname.patch/
> https://sources.debian.net/src/linux/4.9.25-1/debian/patches/bugfix/all/tools-lib-lockdep-use-ldflags.patch/

Thanks Ben. I got it building again on 4.11, will run a few more tests in the
morning and will send a pull request.


-- 

Thanks,
Sasha

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2017-05-04  3:43 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-05-03 20:13 Future of liblockdep Ben Hutchings
2017-05-03 21:00 ` alexander.levin
2017-05-03 21:19   ` Ben Hutchings
2017-05-04  3:42     ` alexander.levin

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.