On 4/20/21 11:02 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 4/20/21 9:01 AM, Coly Li wrote:
>> On 4/20/21 9:36 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 4/19/21 10:20 PM, Coly Li wrote:
>>>> On 4/20/21 12:02 PM, kernel test robot wrote:
>>>>> tree:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-block.git for-5.13/drivers
>>>>> head:   637d8f534626747ad165c9d28c6673d88d39399d
>>>>> commit: 97d69b16cb973e04ea5309b9cb4356aa6b42c54e [44/80] bcache: add initial data structures for nvm pages
>>>>> config: i386-randconfig-a012-20210419 (attached as .config)
>>>>> compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-22) 9.3.0
>>>>> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
>>>>>         # https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-block.git/commit/?id=97d69b16cb973e04ea5309b9cb4356aa6b42c54e
>>>>>         git remote add block https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-block.git
>>>>>         git fetch --no-tags block for-5.13/drivers
>>>>>         git checkout 97d69b16cb973e04ea5309b9cb4356aa6b42c54e
>>>>>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>>>>>         make W=1 W=1 ARCH=i386 
>>>>>
>>>>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
>>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>>>>>
>>>>>    In file included from <command-line>:32:
>>>>>>> ./usr/include/linux/bcache-nvm.h:109:3: error: #error "Non-64bit platform is not supported"
>>>>>      109 |  #error "Non-64bit platform is not supported"
>>>>>          |   ^~~~~
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This series is result of community cooperation, "#error" is to make sure
>>>> this header won't be used in non-64bit platform. And following patches
>>>> in this series make sure the "#error" won't be triggered.
>>>
>>> It sounds like the series is ordered wrong, then. You don't introduce a
>>> known failure point, then fix it up in subsequent patches. You ensure
>>> that the condition can never happen, then introduce the change.
>>> Otherwise you're left with broken bisection points, which is
>>> problematic.
>>>
>>> I need to take a closer look, but will any 32-bit kernel compile fail at
>>> that commit???
>>>
>>
>> The whole series won't fail 32-bit kernel compiling. But, don't spend
>> you time on it for now, I will prepare a better code base for 5.14 merge
>> window.
> 
> Right, but in the middle of it it will? That's kind of the point. We
> can't have known breakage in the middle of a series, it'll ruin any
> attempts at bisecting issues on 32-bit if we happen to end up in the
> broken area at some point.
> 

Copied. I will take care of this in future. Thank you for the hint.

Coly Li