linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 438 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:

Cannot find symbol for section 255: .text.opal_int_set_mfrr.
arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-call.o: failed

and many more similar.

Caused by commit

  9e419de4c678 ("recordmcount: Correct st_shndx handling")

(I bisected it to this.)

I have reverted that commit for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 06:08:25PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
> 
> Cannot find symbol for section 255: .text.opal_int_set_mfrr.
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-call.o: failed
> 
> and many more similar.
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   9e419de4c678 ("recordmcount: Correct st_shndx handling")

Argh.. lemme try and reproduce :/

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 10:26:39 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 06:08:25PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > allyesconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > Cannot find symbol for section 255: .text.opal_int_set_mfrr.
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-call.o: failed
> > 
> > and many more similar.
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   9e419de4c678 ("recordmcount: Correct st_shndx handling")  
> 
> Argh.. lemme try and reproduce :/

I'll go and revert this patch, and wait for a new version from Peter.

Hmm, crap, this is also sent to Linus. I'll stop that too.

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Mark-PK Tsai]

> 
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 10:26:39 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 06:08:25PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > > allyesconfig) failed like this:
> > > 
> > > Cannot find symbol for section 255: .text.opal_int_set_mfrr.
> > > arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/opal-call.o: failed
> > > 
> > > and many more similar.
> > > 
> > > Caused by commit
> > > 
> > >   9e419de4c678 ("recordmcount: Correct st_shndx handling")  
> > 
> > Argh.. lemme try and reproduce :/
> 
> I'll go and revert this patch, and wait for a new version from Peter.
> 
> Hmm, crap, this is also sent to Linus. I'll stop that too.
> 
> -- Steve

I found the the build fail is because PPC64 is big endian and this
patch use st_shndx directyly.

Here is the case which cause this problem:
recordmcount search symbol for txtndx = 255(0xff), but the
corresponding symbol has st_shndx = 0xff00(bit endian) which
equals SHN_LORESERVE, so the updated get_symindex() return 0.

I send the patch v2 to fix it.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210615064720.21950-1-mark-pk.tsai@mediatek.com/

Below is the test environment I used:
https://musl.cc/powerpc64-linux-musl-cross.tgz
make allyesconfig CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc64-linux-musl- ARCH=powerpc
make vmlinux CROSS_COMPILE=powerpc64-linux-musl- ARCH=powerpc

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 748 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:

arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:10: error: 'struct seq_buf' has no member named 'readpos'
  604 |         .readpos = 0,
      |          ^~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:20: error: excess elements in struct initializer [-Werror]
  604 |         .readpos = 0,
      |                    ^
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:20: note: (near initialization for 'ppc_hw_desc')
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

Caused by commit

  d0ed46b60396 ("tracing: Move readpos from seq_buf to trace_seq")

I have used the ftrace tree from next-20231020 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 01:30:33PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:10: error: 'struct seq_buf' has no member named 'readpos'
>   604 |         .readpos = 0,

This would fix it.

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c
index 2f1026fba00d..34975532e44c 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c
@@ -601,7 +601,6 @@ struct seq_buf ppc_hw_desc __initdata = {
 	.buffer = ppc_hw_desc_buf,
 	.size = sizeof(ppc_hw_desc_buf),
 	.len = 0,
-	.readpos = 0,
 };
 
 static __init void probe_machine(void)


Steven, do you prefer fixup patches like this, or do you want a v3 that
includes this?

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 04:32:24 +0100
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:

> Steven, do you prefer fixup patches like this, or do you want a v3 that
> includes this?

Please send a fixup patch. I don't like to rebase my for-next branch.

Thanks,

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 898 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 13:30:33 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:10: error: 'struct seq_buf' has no member named 'readpos'
>   604 |         .readpos = 0,
>       |          ^~~~~~~
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:20: error: excess elements in struct initializer [-Werror]
>   604 |         .readpos = 0,
>       |                    ^
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:20: note: (near initialization for 'ppc_hw_desc')
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   d0ed46b60396 ("tracing: Move readpos from seq_buf to trace_seq")
> 
> I have used the ftrace tree from next-20231020 for today.

This is still failing ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 12:18:16 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 13:30:33 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > 
> > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:10: error: 'struct seq_buf' has no member named 'readpos'
> >   604 |         .readpos = 0,
> >       |          ^~~~~~~
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:20: error: excess elements in struct initializer [-Werror]
> >   604 |         .readpos = 0,
> >       |                    ^
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:604:20: note: (near initialization for 'ppc_hw_desc')
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   d0ed46b60396 ("tracing: Move readpos from seq_buf to trace_seq")
> > 
> > I have used the ftrace tree from next-20231020 for today.  
> 
> This is still failing ...
> 

Ah, I never pushed it up from trace/for-next to for-next. Thanks for the reminder.

I'll do that now.

-- Steve

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 415 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:

Inconsistent kallsyms data
Try make KALLSYMS_EXTRA_PASS=1 as a workaround

I am not sure what caused this - maybe commit

  4f1f18311591 ("scripts: ftrace - move the sort-processing in ftrace_init")

I have used the ftrace tree from next-20220111 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 551 bytes --]

Hi all,

On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 11:31:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> Inconsistent kallsyms data
> Try make KALLSYMS_EXTRA_PASS=1 as a workaround
> 
> I am not sure what caused this - maybe commit
> 
>   4f1f18311591 ("scripts: ftrace - move the sort-processing in ftrace_init")
> 
> I have used the ftrace tree from next-20220111 for today.

I am still getting this.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 12:02:40 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 11:31:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > Inconsistent kallsyms data
> > Try make KALLSYMS_EXTRA_PASS=1 as a workaround
> > 
> > I am not sure what caused this - maybe commit
> > 
> >   4f1f18311591 ("scripts: ftrace - move the sort-processing in ftrace_init")
> > 
> > I have used the ftrace tree from next-20220111 for today.  
> 
> I am still getting this.
> 

OK, I'll take a look.

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 12:02:40 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2022 11:31:03 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > Inconsistent kallsyms data
> > Try make KALLSYMS_EXTRA_PASS=1 as a workaround
> > 
> > I am not sure what caused this - maybe commit
> > 
> >   4f1f18311591 ("scripts: ftrace - move the sort-processing in ftrace_init")
> > 
> > I have used the ftrace tree from next-20220111 for today.  
> 
> I am still getting this.
> 

What compiler are you using, because I built my branch against all archs
and it didn't have an issue.

I can try to see if it is with linux-next and something my tree has with
other updates.

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 530 bytes --]

Hi Steve,

On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 21:16:33 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> What compiler are you using, because I built my branch against all archs
> and it didn't have an issue.

gcc (Debian 10.3.0-11) 10.3.0
GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.37

I am doing a native build on ppc64le.

> I can try to see if it is with linux-next and something my tree has with
> other updates.

Thanks.  There are some changes in the kbuild tree that may interact, I
guess.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 727 bytes --]

Hi Steve,

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:58:08 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 21:16:33 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > What compiler are you using, because I built my branch against all archs
> > and it didn't have an issue.  
> 
> gcc (Debian 10.3.0-11) 10.3.0
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.37
> 
> I am doing a native build on ppc64le.
> 
> > I can try to see if it is with linux-next and something my tree has with
> > other updates.  
> 
> Thanks.  There are some changes in the kbuild tree that may interact, I
> guess.

It also presumably could depend on the actual kernel config being tested.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:02:58 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> 
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:58:08 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 21:16:33 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:  
> > >
> > > What compiler are you using, because I built my branch against all archs
> > > and it didn't have an issue.    
> > 
> > gcc (Debian 10.3.0-11) 10.3.0
> > GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.37
> > 
> > I am doing a native build on ppc64le.
> >   
> > > I can try to see if it is with linux-next and something my tree has with
> > > other updates.    
> > 
> > Thanks.  There are some changes in the kbuild tree that may interact, I
> > guess.  
> 
> It also presumably could depend on the actual kernel config being tested.
> 

I can't reproduce it, and doing searches on this error, seems that it
happens "randomly". I haven't found what can cause it yet.

I don't have a way to build nativly, but if you send me your config, I
can still try to cross compile it to see if it triggers.

Does it fail on anything else?

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 807 bytes --]

Hi Steve,

On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 22:25:39 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> I can't reproduce it, and doing searches on this error, seems that it
> happens "randomly". I haven't found what can cause it yet.

rats :-(

> I don't have a way to build nativly, but if you send me your config, I
> can still try to cross compile it to see if it triggers.

I just use ppc64_defconfig (which may vary depending on what is merged
into my tree at the time).  I don't save actual .config files, sorry.

So:

$ make ARCH=powerpc ppc64_defconfig

> Does it fail on anything else?

This is the first build I do after merging each tree, so I don't know
about others.  I may be able to do some testing later today (after
linux-next is released).

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:34:18 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> > Does it fail on anything else?  
> 
> This is the first build I do after merging each tree, so I don't know
> about others.  I may be able to do some testing later today (after
> linux-next is released).

Could you see if this fixes it? This is a revert of part of the patch.
Yinan, was there a reason you moved this code?

-- Steve

diff --git a/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh b/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh
index dd9955f45774..5cdd9bc5c385 100755
--- a/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh
+++ b/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh
@@ -400,9 +400,6 @@ if [ -n "${CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF}" -a -n "${CONFIG_BPF}" ]; then
 	${RESOLVE_BTFIDS} vmlinux
 fi
 
-info SYSMAP System.map
-mksysmap vmlinux System.map
-
 if [ -n "${CONFIG_BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT}" ]; then
 	info SORTTAB vmlinux
 	if ! sorttable vmlinux; then
@@ -411,6 +408,9 @@ if [ -n "${CONFIG_BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT}" ]; then
 	fi
 fi
 
+info SYSMAP System.map
+mksysmap vmlinux System.map
+
 # step a (see comment above)
 if [ -n "${CONFIG_KALLSYMS}" ]; then
 	mksysmap ${kallsyms_vmlinux} .tmp_System.map

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Yinan Liu]

Hi, steven

When sorttable is executed, system.map is queried, so the creation
of system.map is moved forward. Did that make a difference?

在 2022/1/14 上午11:50, Steven Rostedt 写道:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:34:18 +1100
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
>>> Does it fail on anything else?
>>
>> This is the first build I do after merging each tree, so I don't know
>> about others.  I may be able to do some testing later today (after
>> linux-next is released).
> 
> Could you see if this fixes it? This is a revert of part of the patch.
> Yinan, was there a reason you moved this code?
> 
> -- Steve
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh b/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh
> index dd9955f45774..5cdd9bc5c385 100755
> --- a/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh
> +++ b/scripts/link-vmlinux.sh
> @@ -400,9 +400,6 @@ if [ -n "${CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF}" -a -n "${CONFIG_BPF}" ]; then
>   	${RESOLVE_BTFIDS} vmlinux
>   fi
>   
> -info SYSMAP System.map
> -mksysmap vmlinux System.map
> -
>   if [ -n "${CONFIG_BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT}" ]; then
>   	info SORTTAB vmlinux
>   	if ! sorttable vmlinux; then
> @@ -411,6 +408,9 @@ if [ -n "${CONFIG_BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT}" ]; then
>   	fi
>   fi
>   
> +info SYSMAP System.map
> +mksysmap vmlinux System.map
> +
>   # step a (see comment above)
>   if [ -n "${CONFIG_KALLSYMS}" ]; then
>   	mksysmap ${kallsyms_vmlinux} .tmp_System.map

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 891 bytes --]

Hi Steve

On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 22:50:48 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:34:18 +1100
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> > > Does it fail on anything else?    
> > 
> > This is the first build I do after merging each tree, so I don't know
> > about others.  I may be able to do some testing later today (after
> > linux-next is released).  
> 
> Could you see if this fixes it? This is a revert of part of the patch.
> Yinan, was there a reason you moved this code?

It is my fault, sorry.  I got the merge resolution wrong and managed to
remove both copies of:

info SYSMAP System.map
mksysmap vmlinux System.map

putting it back before

if [ -n "${CONFIG_BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT}" ]; then

makes it work!

I am so sorry.  I will fix up my merge resolution for Monday.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 458 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
failed like this:


Sphinx parallel build error:
docutils.utils.SystemMessage: /home/sfr/next/next/Documentation/trace/histogram-design.rst:219: (SEVERE/4) Unexpected section title.

.
.

Caused by commit

  16b585fe7192 ("tracing: Add histogram-design document")

I am running a slightly out of date version os sphynx (2.4.3) ...

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Tom Zanussi]

Hi,

On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 17:42 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> failed like this:
> 
> 
> Sphinx parallel build error:
> docutils.utils.SystemMessage:
> /home/sfr/next/next/Documentation/trace/histogram-design.rst:219:
> (SEVERE/4) Unexpected section title.
> 
> .
> .
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   16b585fe7192 ("tracing: Add histogram-design document")
> 
> I am running a slightly out of date version os sphynx (2.4.3) ...
> 

Apparently sphynx doesn't like my funky ascii-art.  I'll post a patch
fixing this shortly.

Thanks,

Tom

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 17:42:53 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> failed like this:
> 
> 
> Sphinx parallel build error:
> docutils.utils.SystemMessage: /home/sfr/next/next/Documentation/trace/histogram-design.rst:219: (SEVERE/4) Unexpected section title.
> 
> .
> .
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   16b585fe7192 ("tracing: Add histogram-design document")
> 
> I am running a slightly out of date version os sphynx (2.4.3) ...
> 

It appears to be the ascii art that is causing the issue. I have no idea
how to fix it. If someone has a patch they would like to submit, I will
take it before I push it off to Linus.

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Tom Zanussi]

Hi Steve,

On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 11:22 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 17:42:53 +1000
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> > failed like this:
> > 
> > 
> > Sphinx parallel build error:
> > docutils.utils.SystemMessage:
> > /home/sfr/next/next/Documentation/trace/histogram-design.rst:219:
> > (SEVERE/4) Unexpected section title.
> > 
> > .
> > .
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   16b585fe7192 ("tracing: Add histogram-design document")
> > 
> > I am running a slightly out of date version os sphynx (2.4.3) ...
> > 
> 
> It appears to be the ascii art that is causing the issue. I have no
> idea
> how to fix it. If someone has a patch they would like to submit, I
> will
> take it before I push it off to Linus.
> 
> -- Steve

I just sent you/posted a patch to fix this.  Should be in your inbox
already.

Thanks,

Tom

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Wed, 03 Jun 2020 10:24:36 -0500
Tom Zanussi <zanussi@kernel.org> wrote:

> > It appears to be the ascii art that is causing the issue. I have no
> > idea
> > how to fix it. If someone has a patch they would like to submit, I
> > will
> > take it before I push it off to Linus.
> > 
> > -- Steve  
> 
> I just sent you/posted a patch to fix this.  Should be in your inbox
> already.

Thanks Tom!

Stephen,

Can you test if this fixes the issue for you? If so, I'll add it push it to
my for-next branch.

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 727 bytes --]

Hi Steven,

On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 11:30:58 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 03 Jun 2020 10:24:36 -0500
> Tom Zanussi <zanussi@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > > It appears to be the ascii art that is causing the issue. I have no
> > > idea
> > > how to fix it. If someone has a patch they would like to submit, I
> > > will
> > > take it before I push it off to Linus.
> > > 
> > > -- Steve    
> > 
> > I just sent you/posted a patch to fix this.  Should be in your inbox
> > already.  
> 
> Thanks Tom!
> 
> Stephen,
> 
> Can you test if this fixes the issue for you? If so, I'll add it push it to
> my for-next branch.

See my ack on the patch.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1239 bytes --]

Hi Steven,

After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allnoconfig) failed like this:

In file included from include/asm-generic/percpu.h:6:0,
                 from arch/powerpc/include/asm/percpu.h:19,
                 from include/linux/percpu.h:11,
                 from include/linux/sched.h:41,
                 from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:17:
include/linux/percpu.h:138:17: error: 'printk_func_t' undeclared here (not in a function)
 DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
                 ^
include/linux/percpu-defs.h:101:38: note: in definition of macro 'DECLARE_PER_CPU_SECTION'
  extern __PCPU_ATTRS(sec) __typeof__(type) name
                                      ^
include/linux/percpu.h:138:1: note: in expansion of macro 'DECLARE_PER_CPU'
 DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
 ^

Caused by commit afdc34a3d3b8 ("printk: Add per_cpu printk func to
allow printk to be diverted").  See Rule 1 in
Documentation/SubmitChecklist.

I reverted that commit (and the following one (a9edc8809328 "x86/nmi:
Perform a safe NMI stack trace on all CPUs" in case it depended in it)
for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Jiri Kosina]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi Steven,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
> 
> In file included from include/asm-generic/percpu.h:6:0,
>                  from arch/powerpc/include/asm/percpu.h:19,
>                  from include/linux/percpu.h:11,
>                  from include/linux/sched.h:41,
>                  from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:17:
> include/linux/percpu.h:138:17: error: 'printk_func_t' undeclared here (not in a function)
>  DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
>                  ^
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:101:38: note: in definition of macro 'DECLARE_PER_CPU_SECTION'
>   extern __PCPU_ATTRS(sec) __typeof__(type) name
>                                       ^
> include/linux/percpu.h:138:1: note: in expansion of macro 'DECLARE_PER_CPU'
>  DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
>  ^




From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Subject: [PATCH] printk: make sure printk_func_t is known in percpu.h

Commit afdc34a3d3b8 ("printk: Add per_cpu printk func to allow printk to 
be diverted") caused percpu variable printk_func to be declared in 
percpu.h. Make sure that the corresponding type is known at the time of 
declaration.

Fixes build failure on certain arch/config combinations.

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
---
 include/linux/percpu.h | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/percpu.h b/include/linux/percpu.h
index a3aa63e..c94c766 100644
--- a/include/linux/percpu.h
+++ b/include/linux/percpu.h
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
 #include <linux/cpumask.h>
 #include <linux/pfn.h>
 #include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/printk.h>
 
 #include <asm/percpu.h>
 

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

> 
> From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
> Subject: [PATCH] printk: make sure printk_func_t is known in percpu.h
> 
> Commit afdc34a3d3b8 ("printk: Add per_cpu printk func to allow printk to 
> be diverted") caused percpu variable printk_func to be declared in 
> percpu.h. Make sure that the corresponding type is known at the time of 
> declaration.
> 
> Fixes build failure on certain arch/config combinations.
> 
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
> ---
>  include/linux/percpu.h | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/percpu.h b/include/linux/percpu.h
> index a3aa63e..c94c766 100644
> --- a/include/linux/percpu.h
> +++ b/include/linux/percpu.h
> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>  #include <linux/cpumask.h>
>  #include <linux/pfn.h>
>  #include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/printk.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/percpu.h>

Unfortunately, this wasn't the fix. This was an allnoconfig, which
means printk wasn't defined.

-- Steve


From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 09:16:58 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] printk/percpu: Do not define printk_func when printk is not
 defined

To avoid include hell, the per_cpu variable printk_func was declared
in percpu.h. But it is only defined if printk is defined.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20141121183215.01ba539c@canb.auug.org.au

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
 include/linux/percpu.h | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/percpu.h b/include/linux/percpu.h
index ba2e85a0ff5b..74398ef1d294 100644
--- a/include/linux/percpu.h
+++ b/include/linux/percpu.h
@@ -134,7 +134,9 @@ extern phys_addr_t per_cpu_ptr_to_phys(void *addr);
 	(typeof(type) __percpu *)__alloc_percpu(sizeof(type),		\
 						__alignof__(type))
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK
 /* To avoid include hell, as printk can not declare this, we declare it here */
 DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
+#endif
 
 #endif /* __LINUX_PERCPU_H */
-- 
2.1.1

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Jiri Kosina]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> > From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
> > Subject: [PATCH] printk: make sure printk_func_t is known in percpu.h
> > 
> > Commit afdc34a3d3b8 ("printk: Add per_cpu printk func to allow printk to 
> > be diverted") caused percpu variable printk_func to be declared in 
> > percpu.h. Make sure that the corresponding type is known at the time of 
> > declaration.
> > 
> > Fixes build failure on certain arch/config combinations.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/percpu.h | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/percpu.h b/include/linux/percpu.h
> > index a3aa63e..c94c766 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/percpu.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/percpu.h
> > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> >  #include <linux/pfn.h>
> >  #include <linux/init.h>
> > +#include <linux/printk.h>
> >  
> >  #include <asm/percpu.h>
> 
> Unfortunately, this wasn't the fix. This was an allnoconfig, which
> means printk wasn't defined.

Ah, thanks, that indeed needs to be done as well.

I still think that the patch I sent should be applied, as there might be 
configurations where printk.h doesn't implicitly transitively make it into 
percpu.h.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 09:20:36 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/percpu.h b/include/linux/percpu.h
> > index a3aa63e..c94c766 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/percpu.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/percpu.h
> > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> >  #include <linux/pfn.h>
> >  #include <linux/init.h>
> > +#include <linux/printk.h>
> >  
> >  #include <asm/percpu.h>
> 
> Unfortunately, this wasn't the fix. This was an allnoconfig, which
> means printk wasn't defined.
> 

Just to be safe, I put the printk.h back in. Although it doesn't seem
to be needed.

-- Steve

>From da1e044a557571fd3718bd161b7ce7f36d3f999e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 09:16:58 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] printk/percpu: Do not define printk_func when printk is not
 defined

To avoid include hell, the per_cpu variable printk_func was declared
in percpu.h. But it is only defined if printk is defined.

Also add a printk.h include in percpu.h just to be safe.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20141121183215.01ba539c@canb.auug.org.au

Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
 include/linux/percpu.h | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/percpu.h b/include/linux/percpu.h
index ba2e85a0ff5b..87e9082a2bd4 100644
--- a/include/linux/percpu.h
+++ b/include/linux/percpu.h
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
 #include <linux/preempt.h>
 #include <linux/smp.h>
 #include <linux/cpumask.h>
+#include <linux/printk.h>
 #include <linux/pfn.h>
 #include <linux/init.h>
 
@@ -134,7 +135,9 @@ extern phys_addr_t per_cpu_ptr_to_phys(void *addr);
 	(typeof(type) __percpu *)__alloc_percpu(sizeof(type),		\
 						__alignof__(type))
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK
 /* To avoid include hell, as printk can not declare this, we declare it here */
 DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
+#endif
 
 #endif /* __LINUX_PERCPU_H */
-- 
1.8.1.4

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 18:32:15 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi Steven,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
> 
> In file included from include/asm-generic/percpu.h:6:0,
>                  from arch/powerpc/include/asm/percpu.h:19,
>                  from include/linux/percpu.h:11,
>                  from include/linux/sched.h:41,
>                  from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:17:
> include/linux/percpu.h:138:17: error: 'printk_func_t' undeclared here (not in a function)
>  DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
>                  ^
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h:101:38: note: in definition of macro 'DECLARE_PER_CPU_SECTION'
>   extern __PCPU_ATTRS(sec) __typeof__(type) name
>                                       ^
> include/linux/percpu.h:138:1: note: in expansion of macro 'DECLARE_PER_CPU'
>  DECLARE_PER_CPU(printk_func_t, printk_func);
>  ^
> 
> Caused by commit afdc34a3d3b8 ("printk: Add per_cpu printk func to
> allow printk to be diverted").  See Rule 1 in
> Documentation/SubmitChecklist.
> 

I had to fight header include hell with that change. That's why rule 1
wasn't followed so well.

Thanks Jiri for fixing it. I'll start running your patch through my
tests.

-- Steve

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 621 bytes --]

Hi Steven,

After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c: In function 'ftrace_dump_buf':
kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:29:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:86:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')

Caused by commit eaac1836c10e ("tracing: Replace the static global
per_cpu arrays with allocated per_cpu").

I have used the ftrace tree from next-20130228 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 13:47 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Steven,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c: In function 'ftrace_dump_buf':
> kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:29:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:86:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> 
> Caused by commit eaac1836c10e ("tracing: Replace the static global
> per_cpu arrays with allocated per_cpu").
> 
> I have used the ftrace tree from next-20130228 for today.

Thanks, I'll take a look into it. I also found that my latest push also
broke the ftrace snapshot feature. I'm currently bisecting what caused
that.

Hmm, interesting though, I thought it succeeded in building against an
allyesconfig?? Grumble, I'll have to run it through the tests again to
make sure I didn't screw something up, like test the wrong branch :-p

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 13:47 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Steven,
> 
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c: In function 'ftrace_dump_buf':
> kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:29:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:86:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> 
> Caused by commit eaac1836c10e ("tracing: Replace the static global
> per_cpu arrays with allocated per_cpu").
> 
> I have used the ftrace tree from next-20130228 for today.

I rebased, and it should all be good now. I also fixed breakage to the
new snapshot feature. Here's my diff:

-- Steve

diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
index af7be82..b36befa 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
@@ -4133,14 +4133,30 @@ static int tracing_clock_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 #ifdef CONFIG_TRACER_SNAPSHOT
 static int tracing_snapshot_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 {
+	struct trace_cpu *tc = inode->i_private;
 	struct trace_iterator *iter;
+	struct seq_file *m;
 	int ret = 0;
 
 	if (file->f_mode & FMODE_READ) {
 		iter = __tracing_open(inode, file, true);
 		if (IS_ERR(iter))
 			ret = PTR_ERR(iter);
+	} else {
+		/* Writes still need the seq_file to hold the private data */
+		m = kzalloc(sizeof(*m), GFP_KERNEL);
+		if (!m)
+			return -ENOMEM;
+		iter = kzalloc(sizeof(*iter), GFP_KERNEL);
+		if (!iter) {
+			kfree(m);
+			return -ENOMEM;
+		}
+		iter->tr = tc->tr;
+		m->private = iter;
+		file->private_data = m;
 	}
+
 	return ret;
 }
 
@@ -4148,7 +4164,9 @@ static ssize_t
 tracing_snapshot_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *ubuf, size_t cnt,
 		       loff_t *ppos)
 {
-	struct trace_array *tr = filp->private_data;
+	struct seq_file *m = filp->private_data;
+	struct trace_iterator *iter = m->private;
+	struct trace_array *tr = iter->tr;
 	unsigned long val;
 	int ret;
 
@@ -4209,6 +4227,22 @@ out:
 	mutex_unlock(&trace_types_lock);
 	return ret;
 }
+
+static int tracing_snapshot_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
+{
+	struct seq_file *m = file->private_data;
+
+	if (file->f_mode & FMODE_READ)
+		return tracing_release(inode, file);
+
+	/* If write only, the seq_file is just a stub */
+	if (m)
+		kfree(m->private);
+	kfree(m);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 #endif /* CONFIG_TRACER_SNAPSHOT */
 
 
@@ -4273,7 +4307,7 @@ static const struct file_operations snapshot_fops = {
 	.read		= seq_read,
 	.write		= tracing_snapshot_write,
 	.llseek		= tracing_seek,
-	.release	= tracing_release,
+	.release	= tracing_snapshot_release,
 };
 #endif /* CONFIG_TRACER_SNAPSHOT */
 
@@ -5284,7 +5318,7 @@ static __init int tracer_init_debugfs(void)
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_TRACER_SNAPSHOT
 	trace_create_file("snapshot", 0644, d_tracer,
-			  (void *) RING_BUFFER_ALL_CPUS, &snapshot_fops);
+			  (void *)&global_trace.trace_cpu, &snapshot_fops);
 #endif
 
 	create_trace_instances(d_tracer);
diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c b/kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c
index cc1dbdc..349f694 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ static void ftrace_dump_buf(int skip_lines, long cpu_file)
 	trace_init_global_iter(&iter);
 
 	for_each_tracing_cpu(cpu) {
-		atomic_inc(&iter.tr->data[cpu]->disabled);
+		atomic_inc(&per_cpu_ptr(iter.tr->data, cpu)->disabled);
 	}
 
 	old_userobj = trace_flags;
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ out:
 	trace_flags = old_userobj;
 
 	for_each_tracing_cpu(cpu) {
-		atomic_dec(&iter.tr->data[cpu]->disabled);
+		atomic_dec(&per_cpu_ptr(iter.tr->data, cpu)->disabled);
 	}
 
 	for_each_tracing_cpu(cpu)

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1212 bytes --]

Hi Steve,

On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 21:45:18 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 13:47 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c: In function 'ftrace_dump_buf':
> > kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:29:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> > kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:86:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> > 
> > Caused by commit eaac1836c10e ("tracing: Replace the static global
> > per_cpu arrays with allocated per_cpu").
> > 
> > I have used the ftrace tree from next-20130228 for today.
> 
> I rebased, and it should all be good now. I also fixed breakage to the
> new snapshot feature. Here's my diff:

Of course, I wonder if this is intended for the current merge window
(since it turned up in linux-next so late).  If not, then please don;t
put it in your -next included branch until after -rc1 is released.  If
you are aiming for this merge window, then good luck!  ;-)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 14:42 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> 
> On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 21:45:18 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 13:47 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > 
> > > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > > 
> > > kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c: In function 'ftrace_dump_buf':
> > > kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:29:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> > > kernel/trace/trace_kdb.c:86:33: error: invalid type argument of '->' (have 'struct trace_array_cpu')
> > > 
> > > Caused by commit eaac1836c10e ("tracing: Replace the static global
> > > per_cpu arrays with allocated per_cpu").
> > > 
> > > I have used the ftrace tree from next-20130228 for today.
> > 
> > I rebased, and it should all be good now. I also fixed breakage to the
> > new snapshot feature. Here's my diff:
> 
> Of course, I wonder if this is intended for the current merge window
> (since it turned up in linux-next so late).  If not, then please don;t
> put it in your -next included branch until after -rc1 is released.  If
> you are aiming for this merge window, then good luck!  ;-)
> 

Oh crap, sorry. Quite the contrary. I should have waited for -rc1 as
this is intended for v3.10.

I made some major changes and wanted testing on it as soon as possible.
I've done tons of testing on my own but I wanted a broader audience. Do
you want me to pull my tree and reset it to what is only for 3.9?

All changes I wanted for 3.9 have already made it into Linus's tree.
Everything I've been pushing is destined for 3.10. But as I said. They
are big changes and wanted testing on them early. But it can wait for an
-rc1 window.

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1085 bytes --]

Hi Steve,

On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 22:55:29 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> Oh crap, sorry. Quite the contrary. I should have waited for -rc1 as
> this is intended for v3.10.
> 
> I made some major changes and wanted testing on it as soon as possible.
> I've done tons of testing on my own but I wanted a broader audience. Do
> you want me to pull my tree and reset it to what is only for 3.9?

Yes, please.  The reasoning is that until -rc1 is out we don't want to
complicate life for people whose code has not yet been merged by
reporting problems in code that will not be merged until the next merge
window.

That is why my daily reports during the merge window start with:

"Please do not add any work destined for v3.10 to your -next included
branches until after Linus has release v3.9-rc1."

But I am beginning to realise that not many actually read those reports (I
had the date wrong on two of them this week and it was only noticed after
the second one :-().

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Steven Rostedt]

On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 15:17 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>  
> > I made some major changes and wanted testing on it as soon as possible.
> > I've done tons of testing on my own but I wanted a broader audience. Do
> > you want me to pull my tree and reset it to what is only for 3.9?
> 
> Yes, please.  The reasoning is that until -rc1 is out we don't want to
> complicate life for people whose code has not yet been merged by
> reporting problems in code that will not be merged until the next merge
> window.

OK, I reset it to what I based my work on, and that commit is in Linus's
tree.

> 
> That is why my daily reports during the merge window start with:
> 
> "Please do not add any work destined for v3.10 to your -next included
> branches until after Linus has release v3.9-rc1."
> 
> But I am beginning to realise that not many actually read those reports (I

/me is guilty :-(

> had the date wrong on two of them this week and it was only noticed after
> the second one :-().
> 

I'm try to be better next time.

-- Steve

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ftrace tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 854 bytes --]

Hi Steve,

On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 23:22:58 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 15:17 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >  
> > > I made some major changes and wanted testing on it as soon as possible.
> > > I've done tons of testing on my own but I wanted a broader audience. Do
> > > you want me to pull my tree and reset it to what is only for 3.9?
> > 
> > Yes, please.  The reasoning is that until -rc1 is out we don't want to
> > complicate life for people whose code has not yet been merged by
> > reporting problems in code that will not be merged until the next merge
> > window.
> 
> OK, I reset it to what I based my work on, and that commit is in Linus's
> tree.

Thanks.  It should only be for a few days anyway.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]