Hi all,
After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
/home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c: In function 'root_nfs_data':
/home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c:264:5: error: implicit declaration of function 'fmtcheck'; did you mean 'dst_check'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
fmtcheck(tmp, "%s", 0), utsname()->nodename);
^~~~~~~~
dst_check
Caused by commit
66ab6f062d96 ("nfs: use fmtcheck() in root_nfs_data")
For some reason this did not turn up until I was building the
hwmon-staging tree (maybe some Kconfig change casued it to be built now),
so I have just reverted that commit for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On 17/12/2018 00.16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c: In function 'root_nfs_data':
> /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c:264:5: error: implicit declaration of function 'fmtcheck'; did you mean 'dst_check'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> fmtcheck(tmp, "%s", 0), utsname()->nodename);
> ^~~~~~~~
> dst_check
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 66ab6f062d96 ("nfs: use fmtcheck() in root_nfs_data")
I didn't know anybody had picked that one up. It's completely safe to
just ignore that commit until the fmtcheck() utility is actually in.
Anna, can I take the fact that this was picked up as a sort-of implicit
ack, that I can use if and when I ever get around to resending the
fmtcheck() series? And for simplicitly, would you mind if the nfs patch
would just be routed along with the patches introducing fmtcheck()?
Rasmus
On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 12:18 +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 17/12/2018 00.16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c: In function 'root_nfs_data':
> > /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c:264:5: error: implicit declaration of
> > function 'fmtcheck'; did you mean 'dst_check'? [-Werror=implicit-function-
> > declaration]
> > fmtcheck(tmp, "%s", 0), utsname()->nodename);
> > ^~~~~~~~
> > dst_check
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 66ab6f062d96 ("nfs: use fmtcheck() in root_nfs_data")
>
> I didn't know anybody had picked that one up. It's completely safe to
> just ignore that commit until the fmtcheck() utility is actually in.
>
> Anna, can I take the fact that this was picked up as a sort-of implicit
> ack, that I can use if and when I ever get around to resending the
> fmtcheck() series? And for simplicitly, would you mind if the nfs patch
> would just be routed along with the patches introducing fmtcheck()?
Sure that sounds good. I'll remove it from my tree for now.
>
> Rasmus
>
>