Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb: FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24)

From	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb: FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24)
Date	2017-08-11 01:50 +0200
Message-ID	<ud5nb-4no-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <u9fl8-4xv-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <u9fEt-4EG-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <u9lgS-85O-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <u9AIW-P3-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <ubE5H-Y2-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Hi all,

On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 10:22:08 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 08:29:31 +0000 Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 07/31/2017 06:58 PM, Greg KH wrote:  
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:55:14AM +0000, Laurentiu Tudor wrote:    
> > >>
> > >> That's because the fsl-mc driver selects GENERIC_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN and not
> > >> all arches implement the support for the option. I can submit a patch
> > >> that adds explicit dependencies on arches that it was build-tested (x86,
> > >> arm, powerpc, all both 32 and 64 bits) similar to how it's done here
> > >> [1]. Let me know if you're ok with this fix and i'll submit the fix to
> > >> staging.    
> > >
> > > Ugh, you should not be selecting that option, but rather depending on
> > > the option, right?    
> > 
> > All users in the kernel use "select", so i don't think so. An 
> > interesting use that adds explicit dependencies on architectures can be
> > seen here [1], in the generic code. I've proposed a patch [2] that does 
> > a similar thing for mc-bus. I think it's a good approach as it keeps 
> > things under control by explicitly specifying the architectures on which
> > the driver was compile-tested.
> > 
> > ---
> > Best Regards, Laurentiu
> > 
> > [1] 
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/pci/Kconfig#n28
> > [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9871861/  
> 
> Any resolution of this?

Ping?
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Thread

Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb:  FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24) Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-07-31 18:00 +0200
  Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb:  FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24) Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com> - 2017-08-01 10:30 +0200
    Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb:  FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24) Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2017-08-07 02:30 +0200
      Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb:  FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24) Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2017-08-11 01:50 +0200
        Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb:  FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24) Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-08-11 01:50 +0200
          Re: linux-next: build failure in the staging tree (Was: kisskb:  FAILED linux-next/s390-allmodconfig/s390x Mon Jul 31, 17:24) Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2017-08-11 02:10 +0200

csiph-web