Re: [kbuild-all] [Patch v6.1] x86/kvm: Add AVX512_4VNNIW and AVX512_4FMAPS support

[Ye Xiaolong]

On 11/15, He Chen wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 04:24:39AM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> Hi He,
>> 
>> [auto build test ERROR on kvm/linux-next]
>> [also build test ERROR on v4.9-rc5]
>> [cannot apply to next-20161114]
>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system]
>> 
>> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/He-Chen/x86-kvm-Add-AVX512_4VNNIW-and-AVX512_4FMAPS-support/20161114-170941
>> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git linux-next
>> config: x86_64-kexec (attached as .config)
>> compiler: gcc-6 (Debian 6.2.0-3) 6.2.0 20160901
>> reproduce:
>>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>>         make ARCH=x86_64 
>> 
>> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> 
>>    arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c: In function '__do_cpuid_ent':
>> >> arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c:472:18: error: implicit declaration of function 'get_scattered_cpuid_leaf' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>        entry->edx &= get_scattered_cpuid_leaf(7, 0, CPUID_EDX);
>>                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> >> arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c:472:49: error: 'CPUID_EDX' undeclared (first use in this function)
>>        entry->edx &= get_scattered_cpuid_leaf(7, 0, CPUID_EDX);
>>                                                     ^~~~~~~~~
>>    arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c:472:49: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
>>    cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>
>I have downloaded .config.gz in attachment and use the .config in it
>to build kernel in my local branch again, and I don't see any warn or
>error message.
>
>I wonder whether the previous 0001 and 0002 patches have applied to run
>this test? Or is there something wrong with my compiler or patches?

Hi, He

0day robot has't applied previous 0001 and 0002 patches in this case
for it considered this patch as an individual one. Please ignore this
warning. 

Btw: You could try use git(>=2.9.0) format-patch --base=<commit> (or
--base=auto for convenience) to record what (public, well-known) commit
your patch series was built on.

Thanks,
Xiaolong
>
>Thanks,
>-He
>_______________________________________________
>kbuild-all mailing list
>kbuild-all@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/kbuild-all