linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 644 bytes --]

Hi Jan,

After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:

fs/jfs/jfs_xtree.c: In function 'xtSplitRoot':
fs/jfs/jfs_xtree.c:1256: error: 'rec' undeclared (first use in this function)

Caused by commit bff3333e868578990f6fe794a7cba0c74bd433ac ("dquot:
cleanup space allocation / freeing routines").

This is annoying ... this file system could be build tested on any
architecture, so why wasn't it?

I have used the version of the ext3 tree from next-20100301 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 11:36:34AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> fs/jfs/jfs_xtree.c: In function 'xtSplitRoot':
> fs/jfs/jfs_xtree.c:1256: error: 'rec' undeclared (first use in this function)
> 
> Caused by commit bff3333e868578990f6fe794a7cba0c74bd433ac ("dquot:
> cleanup space allocation / freeing routines").
> 
> This is annoying ... this file system could be build tested on any
> architecture, so why wasn't it?

I did test the compile, but the version in your tree does not match the
one I submitted.

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Jan Kara]

  Hi,

On Tue 02-03-10 11:36:34, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> fs/jfs/jfs_xtree.c: In function 'xtSplitRoot':
> fs/jfs/jfs_xtree.c:1256: error: 'rec' undeclared (first use in this function)
> 
> Caused by commit bff3333e868578990f6fe794a7cba0c74bd433ac ("dquot:
> cleanup space allocation / freeing routines").
> 
> This is annoying ... this file system could be build tested on any
> architecture, so why wasn't it?
  I'm sorry. It's my fault. I've modified Christoph's patch but I forgot to
enable JFS in the test build. Since this isn't the first time something
like this happened to me, I've changed the way I commit patches. They'll
first go to for_testing branch and after a build machine runs them through
allyesconfig and allmodconfig compiles they'll get moved to for_next
branch. So hopefully stupid mistakes like this one should be avoided for
future.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 691 bytes --]

Hi Jan,

On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 18:27:57 +0100 Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
>
>   I'm sorry. It's my fault. I've modified Christoph's patch but I forgot to
> enable JFS in the test build. Since this isn't the first time something
> like this happened to me, I've changed the way I commit patches. They'll
> first go to for_testing branch and after a build machine runs them through
> allyesconfig and allmodconfig compiles they'll get moved to for_next
> branch. So hopefully stupid mistakes like this one should be avoided for
> future.

Sound like a good plan, thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1116 bytes --]

Hi Jan,

After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:

fs/reiserfs/super.c: In function 'reiserfs_show_options':
fs/reiserfs/super.c:652:20: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
fs/reiserfs/super.c:653:50: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
fs/reiserfs/super.c:656:20: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
fs/reiserfs/super.c:657:50: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
fs/reiserfs/super.c:660:20: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_jquota_fmt'
fs/reiserfs/super.c:661:21: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_jquota_fmt'
fs/reiserfs/super.c:663:26: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_jquota_fmt'

Caused by commit 5fa84b871b97 ("reiserfs: Properly display mount options
in /proc/mounts").  Hint: CONFIG_QUOTA is not set in this build.

I have used the ext3 tree from next-20111222 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Jan Kara]

  Hi,

On Wed 28-12-11 11:22:54, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> fs/reiserfs/super.c: In function 'reiserfs_show_options':
> fs/reiserfs/super.c:652:20: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
> fs/reiserfs/super.c:653:50: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
> fs/reiserfs/super.c:656:20: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
> fs/reiserfs/super.c:657:50: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_qf_names'
> fs/reiserfs/super.c:660:20: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_jquota_fmt'
> fs/reiserfs/super.c:661:21: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_jquota_fmt'
> fs/reiserfs/super.c:663:26: error: 'struct reiserfs_sb_info' has no member named 's_jquota_fmt'
> 
> Caused by commit 5fa84b871b97 ("reiserfs: Properly display mount options
> in /proc/mounts").  Hint: CONFIG_QUOTA is not set in this build.
  Ah, stupid me. Fixed now. Thanks for letting me know.

									Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 390 bytes --]

Hi Jan,

After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

ERROR: "new_inode_pseudo" [fs/reiserfs/reiserfs.ko] undefined!

Caused by commit 523096294315 ("reiserfs: Avoid warning from unlock_new_inode()").

I have used the ext3 tree from next-20140807 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Jan Kara]

On Fri 08-08-14 11:52:26, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> ERROR: "new_inode_pseudo" [fs/reiserfs/reiserfs.ko] undefined!
> 
> Caused by commit 523096294315 ("reiserfs: Avoid warning from unlock_new_inode()").
> 
> I have used the ext3 tree from next-20140807 for today.
  Ah, sorry. Somehow I've pushed out old version of that commit. I'll fix
that up.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 446 bytes --]

Hi Jan,

After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc44x_defconfig) failed like this:

ld: fs/ext2/super.o: in function `ext2_fill_super':
super.c:(.text+0x1494): undefined reference to `__divdi3'
ld: super.c:(.text+0x14bc): undefined reference to `__divdi3'

Caused by commit

  455d38a0e62f ("ext2: Fix underflow in ext2_max_size()")

I have reverted that commit for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Jan Kara]

On Thu 31-01-19 15:14:11, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc44x_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> ld: fs/ext2/super.o: in function `ext2_fill_super':
> super.c:(.text+0x1494): undefined reference to `__divdi3'
> ld: super.c:(.text+0x14bc): undefined reference to `__divdi3'
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   455d38a0e62f ("ext2: Fix underflow in ext2_max_size()")
> 
> I have reverted that commit for today.

Yeah, I've fixed that already in my tree. Thanks for letting me know and
sorry for the breakage.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 229 bytes --]

Hi Jan,

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 11:11:22 +0100 Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I've fixed that already in my tree. Thanks for letting me know and
> sorry for the breakage.

Thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4309 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:

In file included from fs/ext2/file.c:28:
fs/ext2/ext2.h: In function 'ext2_get_page':
fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: error: implicit declaration of function 'ext2_check_page'; did you mean 'ext2_get_page'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
      |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                            ext2_get_page
In file included from fs/ext2/balloc.c:15:
fs/ext2/ext2.h: In function 'ext2_get_page':
fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: error: implicit declaration of function 'read_mapping_page'; did you mean 'unmap_mapping_pages'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
      |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                      unmap_mapping_pages
fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: warning: initialization of 'struct page *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion]
fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: error: implicit declaration of function 'ext2_check_page'; did you mean 'ext2_get_page'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
      |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                            ext2_get_page
In file included from include/linux/buffer_head.h:14,
                 from fs/ext2/balloc.c:20:
include/linux/pagemap.h: At top level:
include/linux/pagemap.h:497:28: error: conflicting types for 'read_mapping_page'
  497 | static inline struct page *read_mapping_page(struct address_space *mapping,
      |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from fs/ext2/balloc.c:15:
fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: note: previous implicit declaration of 'read_mapping_page' was here
  760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
      |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from fs/ext2/dir.c:25:
fs/ext2/ext2.h: In function 'ext2_get_page':
fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: error: implicit declaration of function 'read_mapping_page'; did you mean 'unmap_mapping_pages'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
      |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                      unmap_mapping_pages
fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: warning: initialization of 'struct page *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion]
fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: error: implicit declaration of function 'ext2_check_page'; did you mean 'ext2_get_page'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
      |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      |                            ext2_get_page
In file included from include/linux/buffer_head.h:14,
                 from fs/ext2/dir.c:26:
include/linux/pagemap.h: At top level:
include/linux/pagemap.h:497:28: error: conflicting types for 'read_mapping_page'
  497 | static inline struct page *read_mapping_page(struct address_space *mapping,
      |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from fs/ext2/dir.c:25:
fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: note: previous implicit declaration of 'read_mapping_page' was here
  760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
      |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
fs/ext2/dir.c:109:13: error: conflicting types for 'ext2_check_page'
  109 | static bool ext2_check_page(struct page *page, int quiet)
      |             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from fs/ext2/dir.c:25:
fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: note: previous implicit declaration of 'ext2_check_page' was here
  764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
      |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
fs/ext2/dir.c:109:13: warning: 'ext2_check_page' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
  109 | static bool ext2_check_page(struct page *page, int quiet)
      |             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Caused by commit

  32559cea1f55 ("fs/ext2: Use ext2_put_page")

Presumably some missing includes :-(

I have used the ext3 tree from next-20201112 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Jan Kara]

On Fri 13-11-20 10:47:36, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> In file included from fs/ext2/file.c:28:
> fs/ext2/ext2.h: In function 'ext2_get_page':
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: error: implicit declaration of function 'ext2_check_page'; did you mean 'ext2_get_page'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
>       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>       |                            ext2_get_page
> In file included from fs/ext2/balloc.c:15:
> fs/ext2/ext2.h: In function 'ext2_get_page':
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: error: implicit declaration of function 'read_mapping_page'; did you mean 'unmap_mapping_pages'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
>       |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>       |                      unmap_mapping_pages
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: warning: initialization of 'struct page *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion]
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: error: implicit declaration of function 'ext2_check_page'; did you mean 'ext2_get_page'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
>       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>       |                            ext2_get_page
> In file included from include/linux/buffer_head.h:14,
>                  from fs/ext2/balloc.c:20:
> include/linux/pagemap.h: At top level:
> include/linux/pagemap.h:497:28: error: conflicting types for 'read_mapping_page'
>   497 | static inline struct page *read_mapping_page(struct address_space *mapping,
>       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from fs/ext2/balloc.c:15:
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: note: previous implicit declaration of 'read_mapping_page' was here
>   760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
>       |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from fs/ext2/dir.c:25:
> fs/ext2/ext2.h: In function 'ext2_get_page':
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: error: implicit declaration of function 'read_mapping_page'; did you mean 'unmap_mapping_pages'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
>       |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>       |                      unmap_mapping_pages
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: warning: initialization of 'struct page *' from 'int' makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion]
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: error: implicit declaration of function 'ext2_check_page'; did you mean 'ext2_get_page'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>   764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
>       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>       |                            ext2_get_page
> In file included from include/linux/buffer_head.h:14,
>                  from fs/ext2/dir.c:26:
> include/linux/pagemap.h: At top level:
> include/linux/pagemap.h:497:28: error: conflicting types for 'read_mapping_page'
>   497 | static inline struct page *read_mapping_page(struct address_space *mapping,
>       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from fs/ext2/dir.c:25:
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:760:22: note: previous implicit declaration of 'read_mapping_page' was here
>   760 |  struct page *page = read_mapping_page(mapping, n, NULL);
>       |                      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> fs/ext2/dir.c:109:13: error: conflicting types for 'ext2_check_page'
>   109 | static bool ext2_check_page(struct page *page, int quiet)
>       |             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from fs/ext2/dir.c:25:
> fs/ext2/ext2.h:764:28: note: previous implicit declaration of 'ext2_check_page' was here
>   764 |    if (PageError(page) || !ext2_check_page(page, quiet))
>       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> fs/ext2/dir.c:109:13: warning: 'ext2_check_page' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>   109 | static bool ext2_check_page(struct page *page, int quiet)
>       |             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   32559cea1f55 ("fs/ext2: Use ext2_put_page")
> 
> Presumably some missing includes :-(
> 
> I have used the ext3 tree from next-20201112 for today.

Yeah, sorry for that. Should be fixed now.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2649 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

In file included from include/linux/kernel.h:30,
                 from arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h:27,
                 from arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:6,
                 from include/linux/preempt.h:79,
                 from include/linux/spinlock.h:56,
                 from include/linux/wait.h:9,
                 from include/linux/wait_bit.h:8,
                 from include/linux/fs.h:6,
                 from include/linux/highmem.h:5,
                 from include/linux/bvec.h:10,
                 from include/linux/blk_types.h:10,
                 from include/linux/buffer_head.h:12,
                 from fs/ext2/xattr.c:57:
fs/ext2/xattr.c: In function 'ext2_xattr_set2':
fs/ext2/xattr.c:748:42: error: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 2 has type 'ext2_fsblk_t' {aka 'long unsigned int'} [-Werror=format=]
  748 |                         ea_idebug(inode, "creating block %d", block);
      |                                          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~
      |                                                               |
      |                                                               ext2_fsblk_t {aka long unsigned int}
include/linux/printk.h:427:25: note: in definition of macro 'printk_index_wrap'
  427 |                 _p_func(_fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);                           \
      |                         ^~~~
include/linux/printk.h:129:17: note: in expansion of macro 'printk'
  129 |                 printk(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);             \
      |                 ^~~~~~
fs/ext2/xattr.c:88:33: note: in expansion of macro 'no_printk'
   88 | # define ea_idebug(inode, f...) no_printk(f)
      |                                 ^~~~~~~~~
fs/ext2/xattr.c:748:25: note: in expansion of macro 'ea_idebug'
  748 |                         ea_idebug(inode, "creating block %d", block);
      |                         ^~~~~~~~~
fs/ext2/xattr.c:748:59: note: format string is defined here
  748 |                         ea_idebug(inode, "creating block %d", block);
      |                                                          ~^
      |                                                           |
      |                                                           int
      |                                                          %ld

Caused by commit

  38e38567c5bd ("ext2: fix datatype of block number in ext2_xattr_set2()")

I have used the ext3 tree from next-20230815 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1741 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

In file included from include/linux/sysctl.h:27,
                 from include/linux/fanotify.h:5,
                 from fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:2:
fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c: In function 'fanotify_get_response':
fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:233:48: error: suggest parentheses around arithmetic in operand of '|' [-Werror=parentheses]
  233 |                                   TASK_KILLABLE|TASK_FREEZABLE);
      |                                                ^
include/linux/wait.h:283:11: note: in definition of macro '___wait_is_interruptible'
  283 |          (state & (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_WAKEKILL)))
      |           ^~~~~
include/linux/wait.h:935:9: note: in expansion of macro '___wait_event'
  935 |         ___wait_event(wq, condition, state, 0, 0, schedule())
      |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/linux/wait.h:958:25: note: in expansion of macro '__wait_event_state'
  958 |                 __ret = __wait_event_state(wq_head, condition, state);          \
      |                         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:231:15: note: in expansion of macro 'wait_event_state'
  231 |         ret = wait_event_state(group->fanotify_data.access_waitq,
      |               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors

Caused by commit

  3440e7e55ced ("fanotify: allow freeze when waiting response for permission events")

Though, I guess, you could argue that the ___wait_is_interruptible macro
should parenthesise the use of its "state" argument.

I have used the ext3 tree from next-20240306 for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Winston Wen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1996 bytes --]

On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 11:07:17 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> In file included from include/linux/sysctl.h:27,
>                  from include/linux/fanotify.h:5,
>                  from fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:2:
> fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c: In function 'fanotify_get_response':
> fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:233:48: error: suggest parentheses
> around arithmetic in operand of '|' [-Werror=parentheses] 233 |
>                             TASK_KILLABLE|TASK_FREEZABLE); |
>                                       ^ include/linux/wait.h:283:11:
> note: in definition of macro '___wait_is_interruptible' 283 |
>  (state & (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_WAKEKILL))) |           ^~~~~
> include/linux/wait.h:935:9: note: in expansion of macro
> '___wait_event' 935 |         ___wait_event(wq, condition, state, 0,
> 0, schedule()) |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/wait.h:958:25: note: in expansion of macro
> '__wait_event_state' 958 |                 __ret =
> __wait_event_state(wq_head, condition, state);          \ |
>               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:231:15: note: in expansion of macro
> 'wait_event_state' 231 |         ret =
> wait_event_state(group->fanotify_data.access_waitq, |
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   3440e7e55ced ("fanotify: allow freeze when waiting response for
> permission events")
> 
> Though, I guess, you could argue that the ___wait_is_interruptible
> macro should parenthesise the use of its "state" argument.
> 
> I have used the ext3 tree from next-20240306 for today.
> 

Sorry I missed this warning. And agreed! I can add parentheses on the
call side, but it may be more reasonable to add them in the macro.


Hey Peter,

Could you please take a look at the patch attached at your convenience?
Thanks!

-- 
Thanks,
Winston

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-wait-add-parentheses-to-state-argument-in-macro.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1295 bytes --]

From 17bdb67492823e90e77f4e3159d631efc4cdd865 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Winston Wen <wentao@uniontech.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 10:59:59 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] wait: add parentheses to "state" argument in macro

Now if we use macro wait_event_state() like this:

        wait_event_state(waitq, condition,
                        TASK_KILLABLE|TASK_FREEZABLE);

we'll get a build warning in __wait_is_interruptible because of:

        ((state) & (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_WAKEKILL)))

Parenthesise the use of "state" argument to avoid this warning as
it's very common to use "TASK_*|TASK_*" as function parameter in kernel.

Signed-off-by: Winston Wen <wentao@uniontech.com>
---
 include/linux/wait.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/wait.h b/include/linux/wait.h
index 8aa3372f21a0..a4e57865aded 100644
--- a/include/linux/wait.h
+++ b/include/linux/wait.h
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static inline void wake_up_pollfree(struct wait_queue_head *wq_head)
 
 #define ___wait_is_interruptible(state)						\
 	(!__builtin_constant_p(state) ||					\
-	 (state & (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_WAKEKILL)))
+	 ((state) & (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_WAKEKILL)))
 
 extern void init_wait_entry(struct wait_queue_entry *wq_entry, int flags);
 
-- 
2.43.0

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree

[Jan Kara]

On Thu 07-03-24 14:18:37, Winston Wen wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 11:07:17 +1100
> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > In file included from include/linux/sysctl.h:27,
> >                  from include/linux/fanotify.h:5,
> >                  from fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:2:
> > fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c: In function 'fanotify_get_response':
> > fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:233:48: error: suggest parentheses
> > around arithmetic in operand of '|' [-Werror=parentheses] 233 |
> >                             TASK_KILLABLE|TASK_FREEZABLE); |
> >                                       ^ include/linux/wait.h:283:11:
> > note: in definition of macro '___wait_is_interruptible' 283 |
> >  (state & (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_WAKEKILL))) |           ^~~~~
> > include/linux/wait.h:935:9: note: in expansion of macro
> > '___wait_event' 935 |         ___wait_event(wq, condition, state, 0,
> > 0, schedule()) |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > include/linux/wait.h:958:25: note: in expansion of macro
> > '__wait_event_state' 958 |                 __ret =
> > __wait_event_state(wq_head, condition, state);          \ |
> >               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:231:15: note: in expansion of macro
> > 'wait_event_state' 231 |         ret =
> > wait_event_state(group->fanotify_data.access_waitq, |
> > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   3440e7e55ced ("fanotify: allow freeze when waiting response for
> > permission events")
> > 
> > Though, I guess, you could argue that the ___wait_is_interruptible
> > macro should parenthesise the use of its "state" argument.
> > 
> > I have used the ext3 tree from next-20240306 for today.
> > 
> 
> Sorry I missed this warning. And agreed! I can add parentheses on the
> call side, but it may be more reasonable to add them in the macro.

Thanks for fixing this and I agree. For now, I've also pushed out a new
version of your patch with additional parentheses into my tree to unblock
it for linux-next.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR