Re: [Intel-gfx] linux-next: build failure after merge of the drm tree

[Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 4:34 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 12:49 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Sep 2021 07:50:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 15:23:34 +0900 Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 11:33 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > > >
> >  > > After merging the drm tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > > > > failed like this:
> > > > >
> > > > > In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c:39:
> > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.h:9:10: fatal error: stddef.h: No such file or directory
> > > > >     9 | #include <stddef.h>
> > > > >       |          ^~~~~~~~~~
> > > > >
> > > > > Caused by commit
> > > > >
> > > > >   564f963eabd1 ("isystem: delete global -isystem compile option")
> > > > >
> > > > > from the kbuild tree interacting with commit
> > > > >
> > > > >   b97060a99b01 ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to work with GuC")
> > > > >
> > > > > I have applied the following patch for today.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > This fix-up does not depend on my kbuild tree in any way.
> > > >
> > > > So, the drm maintainer can apply it to his tree.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps with
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: b97060a99b01 ("drm/i915/guc: Update intel_gt_wait_for_idle to
> > > > work with GuC")
> > >
> > > OK, so that didn't happen so I will now apply the merge fix up to the
> > > merge of the kbuild tree.
> > >
> > > > > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> > > > > Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:24:19 +1000
> > > > > Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: use linux/stddef.h due to "isystem: trim/fixup stdarg.h and other headers"
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.h | 2 +-
> > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.h
> > > > > index 51dbe0e3294e..d2969f68dd64 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.h
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.h
> > > > > @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
> > > > >  #ifndef INTEL_GT_REQUESTS_H
> > > > >  #define INTEL_GT_REQUESTS_H
> > > > >
> > > > > -#include <stddef.h>
> > > > > +#include <linux/stddef.h>
> > > > >
> > > > >  struct intel_engine_cs;
> > > > >  struct intel_gt;
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.32.0
> >
> > Ping?  I am still applying this ...
>
> Apologies, this fell through a lot of cracks. I applied this to drm-next now.



Rather, I was planning to apply this fix to my kbuild tree.

Since you guys did not fix the issue in time,
I ended up with dropping [1] from my pull request.

I want to get [1] merged in this MW.

If I postponed it, somebody would add new
<stddef.h> or <stdint.h> inclusion in the next development
cycle, I will never make it in the mainline.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/YQhY40teUJcTc5H4@localhost.localdomain/





> Matt/John, as author/committer it's your job to make sure issues and
> fixes for the stuff you're pushing don't get lost. I'd have expected
> John to apply this to at least drm-intel-gt-next (it's not even
> there).
>
> Joonas, I think this is the 2nd or 3rd or so issue this release cycle
> where some compile fix got stuck a bit because drm-intel-gt-next isn't
> in linux-next. Can we please fix that? It probably needs some changes
> to the dim script.
>
> Cheers, Daniel
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada