On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 12:03:17PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:53 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 06:09:52PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > After merging the driver-core tree, today's linux-next build > > > for arm64 allmodconfig failed like this: > > Wait, I thought Linus said this fixup was now resolved. What went > > wrong? > I think this is purely a linux-next build failure. > I do full allmodconfig builds between each merge I do, and what > happened is that as part of the LED merge, I removed the > no-longer-used 'i2c_acpi_find_match_adapter()' to resolve that build > warning. > Then linux-next presumably merged my tree with the driver-core tree, > and that re-instated the use of i2c_acpi_find_match_adapter() - which > was now gone. > But when *I* merged the driver-core tree, I did the merge fixup > correctly to actually re-instate not only the use, but also re-instate > the removed function that now had a use again. Yes, that's exactly what happened - it's purely an issue when Greg's tree is merged automatically, I was reporting the same thing you fixed up. If the initial build of your tree had been broken I'd have been complaining much more loudy and much earlier! > > Linus, should I submit a fix for this? > My tree should be fine, and I really think this is just a temporary > linux-next effect from the above. I think linux-next only handled the > actual syntactic conflicts, not the semantic conflict of "function had > been removed to avoid build error from previous merge, and needed to > be brought back" Right, git just sees the code moving about and got confused. Since you've merged both trees now tomorrow's -next won't do anything for driver-core and the automation will handle everything fine.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
