On 10/18/2018 3:31 AM, Shamir Rabinovitch wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:36:56AM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: >> On Mon, 2018-10-15 at 07:55 +0800, kbuild test robot wrote: > > [...] > >>> drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c: In function 'ib_dealloc_pd': >>> drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c:340:10: error: implicit declaration of function 'rdma_is_user_pd'; did you mean 'rdma_is_zero_gid'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >>> WARN_ON(rdma_is_user_pd(pd)); >>> ^ >>> include/asm-generic/bug.h:122:25: note: in definition of macro 'WARN_ON' >>> int __ret_warn_on = !!(condition); \ >>> ^~~~~~~~~ >>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors >> >> Are you even building this locally before submitting it? Just so you >> know, I ignore anything with kbuild errors. Please fix those up and >> resubmit. >> > > Sure. It was built and tested. But Jason asked me to split the (long) > series of patches to 3 series. This patch is part of series #2. Series > #1 has this commit that add the (assumed) missing function: > [PATCH v2 2/4] IB/verbs: Add rdma_is_user_pd function > > We have 3 patch sets that kbuild test need to apply them all by order: > 1: [PATCH v2 0/4] figure uverbs/kernel ib_pd w/o using ib_pd uobject > 2: [PATCH v2 0/7] convey ib_ucontext via ib_udata > 3: [PATCH v2 0/4] remove ib_pd uobject pointer > > Any way to still split those and not have the kbuild assuming that it > can apply each of those independently? Not that I know of. And in this particular case it looked like there were some resends or something that added to the confusion. Plus some of the series had already been removed from patchworks. Jason knows what he requested on this series, I may punt to him on it ;-)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
