On 01/11/2013 10:05 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 03:37:17PM +0000, James Bottomley wrote: >> On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 09:27 -0600, Brian King wrote: >>> It looks like this was a due to the fact that the new patches >>> added __devinit tags in the same merge window the __devinit tag >>> itself was getting removed. >> >> Not exactly. The patch which makes them nops went into 3.8. Now >> there's a patch queued in, Gregs tree I presume, to remove them all and >> the #defines which causes the compile failure. >> >>> As to the sparse warnings, this patch fixed the ones that >>> were actual bugs in the new code, although we could have >>> made that more clear in the patch description. >>> >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=135716576204083&w=2 >> >> Ah, thanks ... I've been on holiday for a while, so I did miss that. >> >>> There is one outstanding issue I am aware of which was an >>> array bounds compiler warning which looks to be a misdetection >>> by the compiler. Wendy and I discussed adding a BUG_ON >>> to stop the compiler from complaining. >>> >>> Wendy - lets queue these two changes up ASAP. They should both >>> be very simple changes. >> >> If it's a simple gcc bug, just ignore it. >> >> I do need you to redo the patches to remove the __dev annotations, >> though. We can't risk introducing a bisect killing compile breakage if >> Greg's tree merges before mine in the next merge window. > > This change should be pushed to Linus in time for 3.8-final, so there > should not be any bisect issues. We can do this either way. James - what is your preference? Drop everything and do a resend of the entire series or delta patches on top of what is currently in your tree? Thanks, Brian -- Brian King Power Linux I/O IBM Linux Technology Center -- 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
