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

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Shuah,

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 09:05:57 -0700 Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 3/1/24 03:43, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 15:15:02 +0800 David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> >>
> >> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 23:07, Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> >>>
> >>> I can carry the fix through kselftest kunit if it works
> >>> for all.  
> >>
> >> I'm happy for this to go in with the KUnit changes if that's the best
> >> way to keep all of the printk formatting fixes together.

Unfortunately you can't fix this in the kunit-next tree without pulling
in Linus' tree (or the drm-fixes tree) - which seems excessive.
  
> > I am pretty sure that the proper fix has been applied to the
> > drm-fixes tree today (in the merge of the drm-misc-fixes tree).
> >   
> 
> What's the commit id for this fix? I Would like to include the details
> in my pull request to Linus.

My mistake, I misread the merge commit.  It has not been fixed in the
drm-misc-fixes tree or the drm-fixes tree (or Linus' tree since the
drm-fixes tree has been merged there) :-(

The problem in this case is not with the format string types, but with
a missing argument i.e. there is another argument required by the
format string.  It really should be fixed in the drm-misc-fixes tree
and sent to Linus post haste.

At least the change in the kunit-next tree will stop this happening in
the future.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgpKgc9gslSTc.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature