Re: next build: 37 warnings 2 failures (next/next-20160519)

Hi Arnd,

On Thursday 19 May 2016 02:37 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Thursday 19 May 2016 00:45:16 Olof's autobuilder wrote:

quoted

Errors:

        arm64.allmodconfig:
samples/seccomp/bpf-fancy.c:13:27: fatal error: linux/seccomp.h: No such file or directory
samples/seccomp/dropper.c:20:27: fatal error: linux/seccomp.h: No such file or directory
samples/seccomp/bpf-helper.h:20:50: fatal error: linux/seccomp.h: No such file or directory
samples/seccomp/bpf-direct.c:21:27: fatal error: linux/seccomp.h: No such file or directory

This one is interesting: the same header dependency seems to be present for samples/bpf,
but only samples/seccomp fails. Can you check if both are attempted to be built?

samples/bpf/README.rst says about this:

|Kernel headers
|--------------
|
|There are usually dependencies to header files of the current kernel.
|To avoid installing devel kernel headers system wide, as a normal
|user, simply call::
|
| make headers_install
|
|This will creates a local "usr/include" directory in the git/build top
|level directory, that the make system automatically pickup first.

which I assume would fix the problem, but it would be better if Kbuild was smart enough
to do this implicitly when building these samples.

quoted

        powerpc.pasemi_defconfig:
arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c:380:24: error: index 32 denotes an offset greater than size of 'u64[32][1] {aka long long unsigned int[32][1]}' [-Werror=array-bounds]
arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c:408:24: error: index 32 denotes an offset greater than size of 'u64[32][1] {aka long long unsigned int[32][1]}' [-Werror=array-bounds]

I don't see a good way to avoid the warning other than dropping the

       BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct thread_fp_state, fpscr) !=
                    offsetof(struct thread_fp_state, fpr[32][0]));

statements in the powerpc ptrace implementation. It doesn't seem too
important to check for though.

quoted

Warnings:

quoted

      2 drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945.c:1022:5: warning: suggest explicit braces to avoid ambiguous 'else' [-Wparentheses]

I had not seen this before, sent a patch now.

quoted

      3 drivers/pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.c:797:17: warning: too many arguments for format [-Wformat-extra-args]

sent a fix yesterday, got an ack but it wasn't applied yet. I'm sure Linus Walleij
will take care of it soon.

quoted

      6 mm/page_alloc.c:3651:6: warning: 'compact_result' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]

I'm surprised this one is still there, I sent a patch but Michal Hocko came up with
a better fix on May 12, which was not applied yet.

Michael, can you resend this one to Andrew? I suspect he missed it as it was
sent as a reply to mine.

quoted

      2 drivers/xen/balloon.c:154:13: warning: 'release_memory_resource' declared 'static' but never defined [-Wunused-function]

I sent a patch on May 11, subject "xen: remove incorrect forward declaration" and
Stefano Stabellini reviewed it. Ross Lagerwall did the same patch a day earlier,
but neither of them has made it into linux-next so far. According to Ross, this
one should be backported to v4.4.

quoted

      3 fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c:97:16: warning: unused variable 'blockmask' [-Wunused-variable]

I sent a patch on April 16, but got no reply. Resending it now.

quoted

      2 arch/arm/mach-lpc32xx/include/mach/irqs.h:115:0: warning: "NR_IRQS" redefined

I missed this one, as I have some other patches for lp32xx in my randconfig
fixup tree that hides it.

I've created a fix now and applied it to the arm-soc fixes branch.

quoted

      1 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c:1062:16: warning: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Woverflow]
      1 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c:1074:16: warning: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Woverflow]
      1 drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-pmic-wrap.c:1086:16: warning: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Woverflow]

I sent out a patch on May 12 for this, got no reply. I've applied my own patch
now on the arm-soc fixes branch.

quoted

      1 drivers/phy/phy-exynos-mipi-video.c:238:13: warning: 'val' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]

I sent a patch on May 11, it was reviewed by Krzysztof Kozlowski, but not yet
applied.

Is it okay if I send this during the -rc cycle?

Thanks
Kishon