From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Wed Jan 20 23:19:58 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CFD6A8B478; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:19:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gw.catspoiler.org (unknown [IPv6:2602:304:b010:ef20::f2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "gw.catspoiler.org", Issuer "gw.catspoiler.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F36DD17FD; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:19:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (mousie.catspoiler.org [192.168.101.2]) by gw.catspoiler.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u0KNJkVI077393; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:19:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org) Message-Id: <201601202319.u0KNJkVI077393@gw.catspoiler.org> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:19:46 -0800 (PST) From: Don Lewis Subject: Re: svn commit: r294444 - in head/sys/modules: ix ixlv ixv To: bdrewery@FreeBSD.org cc: imp@bsdimp.com, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <56A007CA.2030507@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=iso-8859-7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:19:58 -0000 On 20 Jan, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 1/20/2016 1:59 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >> It would work built part of buildkernel since pci_iov_if.h would exist there. It would fail when built by hand since the kernel config didnąt save us. >> > > I don't understand. The problem was seen in buildkernel. It failed for me last night when I ran "make -j 8 buildkernel". It worked without -j. >> >> >>> On Jan 20, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote: >>> >>> I have no idea how this was working before and why it took so long to >>> manifest. Many people reported failures here in the last day and >>> confirmed this fixed it. >>> > > >