Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfsd tree

From: Chuck Lever
Date: Mon Apr 29 2013 - 12:38:01 EST

On Apr 29, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Simo Sorce <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 12:05 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> On Apr 29, 2013, at 11:45 AM, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:53:37AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>>> On Apr 28, 2013, at 9:24 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> Hi J.,
>>>>> After merging the nfsd tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>>>>> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>>>>> net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c: In function 'gss_proxy_save_rsc':
>>>>> net/sunrpc/auth_gss/svcauth_gss.c:1182:3: error: implicit declaration of function 'gss_mech_get_by_OID' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>>>> Caused byc ommit 030d794bf498 ("SUNRPC: Use gssproxy upcall for server
>>>>> RPCGSS authentication"). gss_mech_get_by_OID() made static to
>>>>> net/sunrpc/auth_gss/gss_mech_switch.c by commit 9568c5e9a61d ("SUNRPC:
>>>>> Introduce rpcauth_get_pseudoflavor()") in the nfs tree (part of the nfs
>>>>> tree that you did not merge).
>>>>> I don't know how to fix this, so I have used the nfsd tree from
>>>>> next-20130426 for today.
>>>> Bruce, it might make sense for me to submit the three server-side RPC GSS patches, and then you can rebase the gssproxy work on top of those. Let me know how you would like to proceed.
>>> I'm happy to take those patches whenever you consider them ready. Would
>>> that fix the problem?
>> Someone would need to modify the gssproxy patches to use the new interfaces.
>>> Also: it looks like 030d794bf498 "SUNRPC: Introduce
>>> rpcauth_get_pseudoflavor()" is in Trond's linux-next, but not his
>>> nfs-for-next. I'm not sure what that means--is it safe to rebase on top
>>> of *that*?
>> That doesn't seem right to me.
> GSS-Proxy patches are 1 year old and we've been delayed once already to
> accomodate the containers work, maybe it's time for your patches to be
> rebased on gssproxy ones ? :-)

Don't sweat it. IMO this is a simple merge problem, unlike the containers work.

Chuck Lever

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at