linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2020-07-21 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20200720: My fixes tree contains: dbf24e30ce2e ("device_cgroup: Fix RCU list debugging warning") The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree. The bpf-next tree gained conflicts against the net-next tree. The security tree still had its build failure for wh

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 21 (drivers/media: use of __WARN())

2017-07-21 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 07/20/2017 09:10 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20170720: > on x86_64: when CONFIG_BUG is not enabled: ../drivers/media/platform/pxa_camera.c:642:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘__WARN’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] ../drivers/media/platform/so

linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2017-07-20 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20170720: The kbuild tree still produces a large number of build warnings so I reverted a commit from it. The drm tree gained a conflict against the drm-intel-fixes tree. The userns tree lost its build failure. Non-merge commits (relative to Linus' tree): 2018 2161 files

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2016-09-29 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Segher, > > [Adding more cc's] > > On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 14:34:42 -0500 Segher Boessenkool > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 07:52:43PM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >> > A new i386-allmodconfig fail showed up relating to VDSO: >> >

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2016-09-29 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi Segher, [Adding more cc's] On Thu, 29 Sep 2016 14:34:42 -0500 Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 07:52:43PM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > A new i386-allmodconfig fail showed up relating to VDSO: > > > > I tried to reproduce it locally with x86-64 build host and could >

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2016-09-29 Thread Segher Boessenkool
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 07:52:43PM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > A new i386-allmodconfig fail showed up relating to VDSO: > > I tried to reproduce it locally with x86-64 build host and could > not, so I wonder if it is a missing HOSTCC vs. CC since next > coverage is power host... > > VDSO2C

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2016-07-21 Thread Paul Gortmaker
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 2:56 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20160720: > > The xfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. A new xfs related fail in mips allmodconfig: ERROR: "dax_do_io" [fs/xfs/xfs.ko] undefined! make[2]: *** [__modpost] Error 1 make[1]: *** [modules

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 21 (gpu/virtio)

2016-07-21 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 07/20/16 23:56, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20160720: > on x86_64, when CONFIG_FB is not enabled: ERROR: "remove_conflicting_framebuffers" [drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtio-gpu.ko] undefined! -- ~Randy

linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2016-07-20 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20160720: The xfs tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. The net-next tree gained a conflict against the net tree. The l2-mtd tree lost its build failure. The crypto tree lost its build failure. The kspp tree gained a conflict against the arm64 tree. The block tree

linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2015-07-20 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20150720: The nfsd tree gained a build failure so I used the version from next-20150720. The sound-asoc tree lost its build failure. The gpio tree gained a build failure for which I added a merge fix patch. The akpm tree lost a patch that turned up elsewhere. Non-merge c

linux-next: Tree for Jul 21

2014-07-21 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi all, Changes since 20140718: The samsung tree gained a conflict against the arm-soc tree. The net-next tree still had its build failure so I used the version from next-20140717. The random tree gained a conflict against the security tree. The akpm-current tree gained a conflict against the