lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Sep]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (tip tree related)

* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 08:39:22AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 00:29:32 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > > > assabet_defconfig and serveral other arm configs) failed like this:
> > > >
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c: In function 'arm_memory_present':
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:260: warning: ISO C90 forbids mixed declarations and code
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:338: error: invalid storage class for function 'free_area'
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:357: error: invalid storage class for function 'free_memmap'
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:386: error: invalid storage class for function 'free_unused_memmap'
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:601: error: invalid storage class for function 'keepinitrd_setup'
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:606: error: initializer element is not constant
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:606: error: (near initialization for '__setup_keepinitrd_setup.setup_func')
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:606: error: expected declaration or statement at end of input
> > > > arch/arm/mm/init.c:252: warning: unused variable 'i'
> > > >
> > > > Caused by commit 719c1514f2fef5f01fcfa2bba81b7bb079c7c6a1 ("memblock/arm:
> > > > Use new accessors") which forgot a closing brace on a new
> > > > for_each_memblock() in arm_memory_present().
> > >
> > > So this commit is back in tip and the error is back in the builds ...
> >
> > The ARM defconfig build doesnt fail here:
> >
> > WARNING: modpost: Found 5 section mismatch(es).
> > To see full details build your kernel with:
> > 'make CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y'
>
> It probably passes because that configuration doesn't result in the
> failing code being built (maybe the failing code is only used for
> sparsemem ?)

Yeah. If sparsemem is important then it would be helpful if you could
enable it in the ARM defconfig if possible - that's what most people
build.

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-09-16 09:37    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site