From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:15:04 +1100 Message-ID: <20111011171504.8bc948ec0daf2d4ed28e562f@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20111005172528.0d0a8afc65acef7ace22a24e@canb.auug.org.au> <1317804373.6766.0.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="PGP-SHA256"; boundary="Signature=_Tue__11_Oct_2011_17_15_04_+1100_VCtL9akY6EoH_UjA" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1317804373.6766.0.camel@twins> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Huang Ying , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org --Signature=_Tue__11_Oct_2011_17_15_04_+1100_VCtL9akY6EoH_UjA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On Wed, 05 Oct 2011 10:46:13 +0200 Peter Zijlstra wr= ote: > > On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 17:25 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >=20 > > After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconf= ig) > > failed like this: > >=20 > > net/rds/ib_rdma.c: In function 'rds_ib_reuse_fmr': > > net/rds/ib_rdma.c:272:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'llist= _del_first' [-Werror=3Dimplicit-function-declaration] > > net/rds/ib_rdma.c:272:6: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer= without a cast [enabled by default] > > net/rds/ib_rdma.c: In function 'rds_ib_flush_mr_pool': > > net/rds/ib_rdma.c:671:4: error: implicit declaration of function 'llist= _add_batch' [-Werror=3Dimplicit-function-declaration] > > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > >=20 > > Caused by commit 1230db8e1543 ("llist: Make some llist functions inline= ") > > interacting with commit 1bc144b62524 ("net, rds, Replace xlist in > > net/rds/xlist.h with llist") from the net tree. The former commit > > removes the declarations of llist_del_first() and llist_add_batch() with > > no explanation (and probably by accident since the definitions still > > exist). >=20 > Ugh yes, my bad. Ingo objected to inlining all those functions and I > then screwed up. There are no users of those two functions in my tree. So can we have that fixed, please? --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ --Signature=_Tue__11_Oct_2011_17_15_04_+1100_VCtL9akY6EoH_UjA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJOk97oAAoJEECxmPOUX5FEuMMP+gPW7VHPEi1TbgW2IkpxlSRi Jto4vpmF1E3ibqFAFSzemAC/XyIPtiAFdKSD/8LjM6QR7tNKfQm7UoeKKdr8B9gX aXV7fvhjUNir1KHxDSghHX8ENu072voqWkngz5azg9E0ntDZMzRKJVvtGCZNWAzK jjZKz+cC2oY+cEj3yUS62CM4HvfoxNjNbvfSmmYXo0oKWtj+jLfDQeto8uayoHSn 68CdWik3MkXbVbCRJM7ynl0TKf6MoJYTRFFqBuX0Ho3brLZk6TUO1LgcPWkztFrN 1hrq3GxJIZv620IzQtJRg4EFP7Rx8M8nIe/kmNVeFEEPbzfMjghUijwuhhomTwMo ZhHAxkNJSRa5h1BwhLIrTWFrmT/YPEhuVrSF3z5BHtLE5SkurjQq0I16TJkV36iA dX4f5C+kLAxJ4cIuPFE++fZICVoT/R0WTLR1w+90Mu+2DmCC4fpBN4DfCZpB7raK 7YIgSERLg+0YyKhWZfnyvOQ9IOvjyy8q6lU79TmssbTlR1/R4wSwsgvzq8eavMA3 NArAD+97nog0h5joKz9TCb+syz0meiItVAzaNShs4qs2n/tprTpKFn7tH8wjWbSF vfsG2nQYk7psBN0vwBk0ijM9qVYsx5VoOt4wIdEjooL/AGPwJmY5AMGUPqlxBLVh sBY3cUCY4dORB5MHJl5B =2SH1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Tue__11_Oct_2011_17_15_04_+1100_VCtL9akY6EoH_UjA--