Received: by 2002:a25:b794:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id n20csp4460185ybh; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 12:03:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwg4kwa5vE0xCEb2UOWzzJwWuSBnsKMtYIWqmnJ1G+niDUkmyehUXSH7aCUlKw84D/um3Q9 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8546:: with SMTP id d6mr4449113plo.207.1565118206883; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 12:03:26 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1565118206; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=kkZLvJRGulpAoeGuzWIiLbjFTMhvoCoaar8hB0XB8+Q/iYJjxaD8hYC6iVR85tcTp7 /Aj2L6uyzqpgDygZWyQIzwzrCKgr0tUVLJg1fydfTzKFGTBRGIDcDoBQZAxcLPbNCLi3 D8MoR0Vu/UOeuLdquUKQNpRm6WcH/pCQsAUMOCllsM1eCfUqKULui4G7GI2QxH8iN3eZ uBJUZO1257M9F2RubDZw+Exr0nbiziZ3pVZSrxcvouZV1mluaU5SIK0jl0aBjZfMW75Q muFunBK+0gp7n5OvEC9Ac6/cbg3AjYskRnKLeqiOIuEBvOewZSJI66r/L7ZEYnjOsGyj W5Rg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject; bh=ucF9zMdZYXr2a7yJ82I2Je7fYkVrmV10oVffNhko5g0=; b=YIChJUk6t8rqRaFbZyTiLUMaRfZtBGh8/4EoXxWP8QY/BUcAeC1InxDaMsZwCTHpax 3EGTG00TX5ZS2E/pTbkrNS4gvocvjWDoRISucjbavtNrbVU/PClmAXsAPG7wxaonbQXy CzU8UKs3Vict+PavQyQ0nCZYfuQ8clj0dNUsehni3VDBg5OnMSGmo+ukhQiyORi1fKgy VwSRRR0lcYnv3+8b9CK+kUzzB360s1CnCfpmfMAPYquFC0nYN1ZwX+yFBzHLgn4V55xT GMwVA8e6IRSjAlFy0GSc/3B+98Nbeg/qrad+b29o+UQ8lR8gzfkHHWB7XiHyWE3zaVSc 5pbQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w10si25462392pgs.529.2019.08.06.12.03.11; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 12:03:26 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726119AbfHFTCb (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:02:31 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:18766 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725939AbfHFTCb (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:02:31 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x76J2ItQ128790 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:02:30 -0400 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2u7e24u49x-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 15:02:29 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:02:22 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.196) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:02:19 +0100 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x76J2IPi46530734 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 6 Aug 2019 19:02:18 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53060A404D; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 19:02:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B06CA4051; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 19:02:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dhcp-9-31-103-47.watson.ibm.com (unknown [9.31.103.47]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 19:02:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the integrity tree From: Mimi Zohar To: Stephen Rothwell , Thiago Jung Bauermann Cc: Mimi Zohar , Dmitry Kasatkin , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Philipp Rudo , Jessica Yu Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2019 15:02:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20190806134530.747d155e@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20190806121519.0f8ac653@canb.auug.org.au> <87imrb0yoh.fsf@morokweng.localdomain> <20190806134530.747d155e@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19080619-0008-0000-0000-00000305E60D X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19080619-0009-0000-0000-0000A17FF045 Message-Id: <1565118136.11223.215.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-08-06_10:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=3 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1908060167 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Stephen, On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 13:45 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Thiago, > > On Tue, 06 Aug 2019 00:18:06 -0300 Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > > > Sorry for the trouble. I wasn't aware of that build time check. > > I'll enable HEADER_TEST and KERNEL_HEADER_TEST for my next patches. ditto > > I do allmodconfig builds which enable those. > > > Thanks for providing the fix. Should I post a new version or can Mimi > > squash the above into the original patch? > > Up to Mimi, but either works (or just committing my patch if the tree is > normally not rebased). Based on the new "Documentation/maintainer/rebasing-and-merging.rst", I'm under the impression that we shouldn't be rebasing, even for "just" adding tags.  Waiting for tags before pushing out to next- integrity is causing delays, but we're trying out this approach.  So for now, I've included your commit. thanks, Mimi