On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 19:57, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Changes since 20090306: >> >> >> The driver-core tree gained a build failure due to a conflict with the >> crypto tree. I have applied a patch to the crypto tree for today. > > I had several (4 of 50) randconfig builds fail with: > > lib/built-in.o: In function `__nla_reserve_nohdr': > (.text+0xd08d): undefined reference to `skb_put' > lib/built-in.o: In function `__nla_reserve': > (.text+0xd121): undefined reference to `skb_put' > lib/built-in.o: In function `nla_append': > (.text+0xd493): undefined reference to `skb_put' > > which happens with CONFIG_NET=n, CONFIG_CRYPTO=y, CONFIG_CRYPTO_ZLIB=[my]. > > CRYPTO_ZLIB selects NLATTR, but obviously the build of nlattr.c fails > when CONFIG_NET=n. Should CRYPTO_ZLIB depend on NET? > Please don't say that CRYPTO_ZLIB should select NET. Bummer, my fault (commit e9cc8bddaea3944fabfebb968bc88d603239beed, netlink: Move netlink attribute parsing support to lib). Obviously I was only worried about crypto/zlib.c needing nlattr.c without pulling in the whole networking code, not about nlattr.c itself needing networking functionality. But still, how could I have missed this compile failure? Does it sound sane to protect the routines that do call skb_put() by #ifdef CONFIG_NET? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html