From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 346F6C4332F for ; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 04:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1202161027 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 04:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229697AbhJaEct (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Oct 2021 00:32:49 -0400 Received: from gandalf.ozlabs.org ([150.107.74.76]:34083 "EHLO gandalf.ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229620AbhJaEcs (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Oct 2021 00:32:48 -0400 Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4HhjrM3VGvz4xbc; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 15:30:11 +1100 (AEDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=201702; t=1635654611; bh=vEzmphI99yoDvtVkzfKFMonILD2eztvW5urapUsPvVo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Mk7qScKRoMs1j8oTqGbOFU3LdsI/EXQw80US3JpfPNL/S0Soo/GA2iRUIRHbpI0Fy VS+SieHf1ER3iMuHYgW7P6Q/GD3R5BTfqx3XqPGSXTw4Ouxo+SiWDhnoxXg4SQPabB UGt6kV2R5+N/ohLgPdcOnSE792ZLljDsInoe+DSzrZFeNFmycxGYhBT4q+koKIA3LA dj9IgVgkERV6mkyAXvMpfyUBOVRaNA5xBuyLS20H6AV6T5jAG8bSDtDrrAHt3crDva Mph40cK8EgVgwqGCEVVFj50r1dVnW7YKDc+vSr2f5X0VgcPaploq/1Ve6/xVhYS3B9 EWOnUZSg4lJMA== Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 15:30:09 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: David Sterba Cc: Andy Shevchenko , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Kees Cook , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the btrfs tree Message-ID: <20211031153009.79a2879d@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20211029121409.GX20319@suse.cz> References: <20211027210924.22ef5881@canb.auug.org.au> <20211029095226.GV20319@suse.cz> <20211029105052.GW20319@suse.cz> <20211029121409.GX20319@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/G+VgasT.S=ynf_DLQSYpa4y"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --Sig_/G+VgasT.S=ynf_DLQSYpa4y Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi David, On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 14:14:09 +0200 David Sterba wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 01:58:53PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Friday, October 29, 2021, David Sterba wrote: > > =20 > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 11:52:26AM +0200, David Sterba wrote: =20 > > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 09:09:24PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: = =20 > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > [I am not sure why this error only popped up after I merged Andre= w's > > > > > patch set ...] =20 > > > > > > =20 > >=20 > >=20 > > =20 > > > Also I think that next time you can use some older version of the > > > for-next branch instead of making the whole subsystem depend on BROKE= N. > > > This causes much more harm in the testing setups that suddenly can't > > > work at all, compared to testing a few days older branch. =20 > >=20 > > The Linux Next reflects current state of affairs and marking something > > which is definitely broken as BROCKEN is what I expect as a developer w= ho > > tests some other stuff on top of broken code. =20 >=20 > I'd argue against using the big 'depdends BROKEN' hammer as much as > possible, surely not for linux-next. Normaly the BROKEN status is earned > after known unfixed breakage for subsystems where nobody cares. If code > is buggy and causes crashes when testing linux-next, that's something we > want to see, not "no test results at all". >=20 > Can you imagine all compilation breakages in linux-next get resolved by > BROKEN? I know Stephen is capable of fixing various compilation problems > by himself and given the whole-tree scope it's heroic efforts, leaving > the shortcuts for the rest. In this case the fix may not be obvious so > I'd understand not merging my for-next branch at all or merging a stub > like the latest rc instead, ie. resolving that on the integration level > and not touching the config or code itself. OK, this was a pain because the error did not show up until late in the day (something in Andrew's patch series exposed the problem - note my report was sent at 9:09 PM - my day starts about 7:30 AM). This is after I had merged maybe 150-200 tress in top of yours. My choices are few at that point (you don't expect me to remerge all those trees, right?). Almost all errors I see are immediately after I merge a tree, at which point my usual response is to reset my tree to before the merge and then merge the previous day's version of the tree. Generally, I do not fix build errors unless they are caused by an interaction between 2 trees. Given that I had spent some time to figure out what the problem was, I expected a fix to be done pretty soon, so the easiest way I could continue was to just mark btrfs broken and continue on (I still had another hour to go before I was finished (my days get really long just before Linus does a release :-( ). --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/G+VgasT.S=ynf_DLQSYpa4y Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAmF+G9EACgkQAVBC80lX 0GzDPAf/V2rEcDDyyC6/LLjMMmA6ctcKZpCLBHJhzcbzEs2fRvyldHqfczXT1c37 2bGTSjRJxp3DIdaWQc5WxSK32AQ6MnvB8wsfRpolHJD1tmcAx5bQg7+obrC9oJVd VZrXC48KVTYoc6XuZ77HFExnrzVP4dES1wXKOWmZIOAmyVmSX+2CV7FrxneUwPDB ALIJzEjmx7LVxK67/O2ZP5pzI7DVmbxxGhJgj4/U/V923Ketv+G/yyY0OPfBKuWA Km3vPCnaHsMJ6Iq/fcUF8qEG+pZKjsCqaE86iomb1MvaWUxvlt0JUnWQ6PynpzHy 5gKFcwQNHvP67IVLla6eVJr5YGrZOQ== =lUs1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/G+VgasT.S=ynf_DLQSYpa4y--