Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 25 (block ?)

[Jens Axboe]

On 2011-10-25 15:10, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> *Note well*
>>>
>>> This tree has nate had any build testing at all.  As such, it probably
>>> doesn't build :-) This tree is really just a roll up of the current state
>>> of the trees when the v3.2 merge window opened.  It will not be put into
>>> the build system referred to below.
>>>
>>
>> I have generated a single linux-next (next-20111025) patch on top of
>> v3.1, it's approx. 100M!
>>
>> $ du -h patch-v3.1-next-20111025.patch
>> 96M     patch-v3.1-next-20111025.patch
>>
>> I noticed this build-failure:
>>
>>  CC      block/blk-throttle.o
>>  CC [M]  fs/fuse/dir.o
>> /mnt/sdb3/linux-kernel/linux-3.1/debian/build/source_i386_none/block/blk-throttle.c:
>> In function 'blk_throtl_drain':
>> /mnt/sdb3/linux-kernel/linux-3.1/debian/build/source_i386_none/block/blk-throttle.c:1221:2:
>> error: implicit declaration of function 'lockdep_is_held'
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>
>> make[5]: *** [block/blk-throttle.o] Error 1
>> make[4]: *** [block] Error 2
>>
>> This happens with Debian's gcc-4.6 (4.6.1-16) and default
>> KBUILD_ENABLE_EXTRA_GCC_CHECKS value.
>>
>> - Sedat -
>>
> 
> Looks like "#include <linux/lockdep.h>" is missing in block/blk-throttle.c?

Hmm, I wonder why it isn't triggering for cfq-iosched.o or elevator.o as
well. Is blk-throttle modular? What is your .config?

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/