Hi Jani, > -----Original Message----- > From: Jani Nikula [mailto:jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2019 4:25 PM > To: Yamada, Masahiro/山田 真弘 <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: lkp@xxxxxxxxx; chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx; > masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH] drm/i915: rename header test build commands to avoid > conflicts > > On Thu, 06 Jun 2019, <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Jani Nikula [mailto:jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx] > >> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2019 10:22 PM > >> To: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Cc: jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx; kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>; Chris > Wilson > >> <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Yamada, Masahiro/山田 真弘 > >> <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: rename header test build commands to avoid > >> conflicts > >> > >> We have a local hack to test if headers are self-contained, while > >> upstreaming a proper generic solution in kbuild [1]. Now that both have > >> found themselves in linux-next, the identical cmd_header_test build > >> commands conflict, leading to errors such as: > >> > >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/header_test_intel_audio.c:1:10: fatal error: > >> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_audio.h: No such file or directory > >> #include "drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_audio.h" > >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> > >> Rename the i915 local build command until the proper kbuild solution > >> finds its way to Linus' master and gets backported to our tree, and we > >> can finally switch over. > >> > >> Note that since the kbuild header test requires CONFIG_HEADER_TEST=y, > >> and our hack requires our debug option CONFIG_DRM_I915_WERROR=y, this > is > >> likely hit only by build test bots. > >> > >> [1] http://marc.info/?i=20190604124248.5564-1-jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx > >> > >> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > > > > > > This is not really queued up yet. > > > > So, we can squash fix-up to avoid 0day bot report. > > Except I don't think your linux-kbuild.git baseline has the files you're > patching below. The problem only exists at the merge of our trees, > currently only linux-next, and not "for real" until the v5.3 merge > window. So I think the sane option is to patch it up in our tree. I do not understand. This is a _real_ problem since drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile.header-test exists in Linus' tree. The 0-day bot reported the build error against my tree, so I must fix it in my tree. > I want to use our local hack until we can get the backmerge from > v5.3-rc1, because it's 7-8 weeks away, and I want to retain our own > pre-merge build test coverage until then rather than relying on 0day > post-merge testing on linux-next. Neither of my patches breaks your test coverage. CONFIG_DRM_I915_WERROR still works in linux-next too. What am I missing? Thanks. Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
