On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 07:03:42AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:21:59PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > On 07/14/2014 10:02 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > >On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 07:21:10PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > >>On 07/14/2014 04:36 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > >>>On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 04:27:41PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > >>>>On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 03:58:31PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > >>>>>Building um:defconfig ... failed > > >>>>>-------------- > > >>>>>Error log: > > >>>>>init/main.c: In function 'start_kernel': > > >>>>>init/main.c:622:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'init_espfix_bsp' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > >>>>>cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > > >>>>> > > >>>>>Looks like it doesn't like 'x86-64, espfix: Don't leak bits 31:16 of %esp returning to 16-bit stack'. > > >>>> > > >>>>Looks like I need commit e1fe9ed8d2a4937510d0d60e20705035c2609aea as > > >>>>well, I'll go queue that up and see if it fixes this. > > >>> > > >>>Nope, that just broke the build in worse ways... Which I totally can't > > >>>understand, odd. > > >>> > > >>>hpa, any ideas? > > >>> > > >> > > >>The um:defconfig build now fails in 3.4, 3.10, 3,14, and 3.15. > > > > > >Yes, hpa's offending patch is now in all of those trees :) > > > > > >Is Linus's tree also failing to build um in the same way? I don't see > > >anything I've missed, do you? > > > > > > > v3.16-rc5 is fine. > > > > I found e1fe9ed8d2a493 as well. But the espfix changes seem to be more extensive. > > From Linus' merge: > > > > Revert "x86-64, modify_ldt: Make support for 16-bit segments a runtime option" > > x86, espfix: Make it possible to disable 16-bit support > > x86, espfix: Make espfix64 a Kconfig option, fix UML > > x86, espfix: Fix broken header guard > > x86, espfix: Move espfix definitions into a separate header file > > x86-32, espfix: Remove filter for espfix32 due to race > > x86-64, espfix: Don't leak bits 31:16 of %esp returning to 16-bit stack > > Ok, let me go rework this whole series and see if I can resolve it. I > missed the fact that there were older patches, I was just looking for > "newer" ones instead... This is now done for the 3.15-stable tree, it should build properly for um, please let me know if it doesn't. I'm working on now adding these changes to the other stable kernels as well. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html