Re: [mmotm:master 38/317] warning: (MN10300 && ..) selects HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG which has unmet direct dependencies (HAVE_NMI)

[Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>]

(adding David H.)

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 01:06:08PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:14:09 +0800
> kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > tree:   git://git.cmpxchg.org/linux-mmotm.git master
> > head:   8c91e2a1ea04c0c1e29415c62f151e77de2291f8
> > commit: 590b165eb905ab322bb91f04f9708deb8c80f75e [38/317] kernel/watchdog: split up config options
> > config: mn10300-asb2364_defconfig (attached as .config)
> > compiler: am33_2.0-linux-gcc (GCC) 6.2.0
> > reproduce:
> >         wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/01org/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
> >         chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
> >         git checkout 590b165eb905ab322bb91f04f9708deb8c80f75e
> >         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
> >         make.cross ARCH=mn10300 
> > 
> > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
> > 
> > warning: (MN10300 && HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH) selects HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG which has unmet direct dependencies (HAVE_NMI)

Hmm, MN10300 selects HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG if MN10300_WD_TIMER is set.  However,
HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG depends on HAVE_NMI which is not selected for arch
mn10300.  So I am scratching my head how this ever worked, regardless of
this patchset.

Hi David,

Does mn10300 have an NMI entry point (it seemed like you copied an old i386
nmi snapshot during the initial port)?

Cheers,
Don


> 
> Hmm, the arch is not supposed to have HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH
> without explicitly selecting it. An it does not in the attached .config.
> I guess this is Kconfig being helpful...
> 
> arch/Kconfig:
> 
> config HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG
>         bool
>         help
>           The arch provides a low level NMI watchdog. It provides
>           asm/nmi.h, and defines its own arch_touch_nmi_watchdog().
> 
> config HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH
>         bool
>         select HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG
>         help
>           The arch chooses to provide its own hardlockup detector, which is
>           a superset of the HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG. It also conforms to config
>           interfaces and parameters provided by hardlockup detector subsystem.
> 
> Idea was to have arch select HAVE_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR_ARCH and it would
> get HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG. Would it be better to make it depend on
> HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG and require the arch select both?
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>