Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: octeon: delete driver

[Guenter Roeck]

On 2/5/20 1:03 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 4:57 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 2/4/20 7:34 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 12:31:16PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 08:06:14PM +0000, Chris Packham wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2020-02-04 at 07:09 +0000, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 04:02:15AM +0000, Chris Packham wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 2020-02-04 at 10:21 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > > > My advice is to delete all the COMPILE_TEST code.  That stuff was a
> > > > > > constant source of confusion and headaches.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was also going to suggest this. Since the COMPILE_TEST has been a
> > > > > source of trouble I was going to propose dropping the || COMPILE_TEST
> > > > > from the Kconfig for the octeon drivers.
> > > >
> > > > Not having it also causes problems.  I didn't originally add it for
> > > > shits and giggles.
> > >
> > > I wonder if the kbuild bot does enough cross compile build testing these
> > > days to detect compile problems.  It might have improved to the point
> > > where COMPILE_TEST isn't required.
>
> It depends...
>
> > Not really. Looking at the build failures in the mainline kernel right now:
> >
> > Failed builds:
> >          alpha:allmodconfig
> >          arm:allmodconfig
> >          i386:allyesconfig
> >          i386:allmodconfig
> >          m68k:allmodconfig
> >          microblaze:mmu_defconfig
> >          mips:allmodconfig
> >          parisc:allmodconfig
> >          powerpc:allmodconfig
> >          s390:allmodconfig
> >          sparc64:allmodconfig
>
> I did receive a report from noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx for the m68k build
> failure. But that was sent to me only, not to the offender, and I do my
> own builds anyway.
>
> More interesting, that report happened after the offending commit landed
> upstream, while it had been in next for 4 weeks.

m68k in -next builds fine for me, and did for a while. I have not seen a build
failure there. There must be a context commit causing this failure, or what
is (or was) in -next differs from what is in mainline.

> > Many of those don't even _have_ specific configurations causing the build failures.
>
> Exactly. These are the "easy" ones, as the all*config builds enable as
> much infrastructure as possible.  It's much harder if some common
> dependency is not fulfilled in some specific config.

Yes, that is correct. But that doesn't mean that it would be a good idea
to retire COMPILE_TEST.

Guenter