Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKwiHFjv7a=+RstT8up7aSctUW5=y0A3nz_FvG=5Jd1DHC07Tw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+55aFz_ww8ohU68Jz34pg_x7gpGpJ+FC-dmS_Rm_VvY01GGpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180228191805.20094-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> <20180228191805.20094-3-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <CAK7LNAQ9WKj5Uz=A2QKctM9H8WFErfo_J_rGSn7B5jig+4gv_w@mail.gmail.com> <CAKwiHFjv7a=+RstT8up7aSctUW5=y0A3nz_FvG=5Jd1DHC07Tw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 18:38:32 +0900
Message-ID: <CAK7LNASc1scA3PTGeaMxeRjzyUFZoFgudvBMDyrULOkrjUWGBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fixdep: do not ignore kconfig.h
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Cc:     Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

2018-03-05 17:15 GMT+09:00 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>:
> On 5 March 2018 at 05:52, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>> 2018-03-01 4:17 GMT+09:00 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>:
>>> kconfig.h was excluded from consideration by fixdep by
>>> 6a5be57f0f00 (fixdep: fix extraneous dependencies) to avoid some false
>>> positive hits
> [...]
>>> We've already had one case [2] where the lack of include/linux/kconfig.h in
>>> the .o.cmd file caused a missing rebuild,
> [...]
>>> [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/2/22/838
>>
>>
>> Sorry, I missed to include this series in the Kbuild fixes PR
>> I sent two days ago.
>>
>> I was not tracking the randomize-struct thread.
>> I read [2] and I noticed the background of this series just now.
>>
>> Hopefully, I will have another opportunity of PR
>> if this series is necessary for v4.16  (seems so)
>
> I should probably have put 3/3 first, if that is 4.16 material, the
> other two can obviously wait for 4.17. They don't really depend on
> each other apart from overlapping context, and the above commit
> message would need slight rewording if put before the others. I can do
> that reordering and resend if you wish.
>
> Rasmus

1/3 is obviously safe, 2/3 too.
I think the current series is OK for v4.16.
I will queue it up to the fixes branch shortly.

Thanks!


-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada