From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758501Ab3KHXPc (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 18:15:32 -0500 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:46069 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757800Ab3KHXP3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Nov 2013 18:15:29 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Al Viro , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20131108180759.12dab53816900b1b58c1ea1b@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 15:15:17 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20131108180759.12dab53816900b1b58c1ea1b@canb.auug.org.au> (Stephen Rothwell's message of "Fri, 8 Nov 2013 18:07:59 +1100") Message-ID: <87r4aqscxm.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18oM2caBJ1fObDi4DcOxImU5ldn+0Axrzc= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.154.105 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -0.0 BAYES_40 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 20 to 40% * [score: 0.2029] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa03 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Stephen Rothwell X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the userns tree X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:26:46 -0700) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi Eric, > > After merging the userns tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this: > > fs/namespace.c: In function 'detach_mounts': > fs/namespace.c:1340:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'br_write_lock' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > br_write_lock(&vfsmount_lock); > ^ > fs/namespace.c:1340:17: error: 'vfsmount_lock' undeclared (first use in this function) > br_write_lock(&vfsmount_lock); > ^ > fs/namespace.c:1340:17: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in > fs/namespace.c:1345:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'br_write_unlock' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > br_write_unlock(&vfsmount_lock); > ^ > > Caused by the interaction between commit d7e58b8abc4f ("vfs: Add a > function to lazily unmount all mounts from any dentry. v3") from the > userns tree and commit 84550b9356af ("RCU'd vfsmounts") from the vfs tree. > > I don't know how to fix this up, so I have just dropped the userns tree > for today. I only dropped that tree because it was the latter of the two > conflicting trees. Yeah. Al has somethng cooking where he renamed the lock. It looks like this just needs the trivial change: s/br_write_lock(&vfsmount_lock)/lock_mount_hash()/ s/br_write_unlock(&vfsmount_lock)/unlock_mount_hash()/ Certainly that is all it needed when I closely inspected an earlier version of Al's changes. He changed the name of the lock and I just happen to be using it. In this case I don't think any of the semantics have changed. Eric