From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8043C48BE7 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 06:50:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9658B2084A for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 06:50:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canb.auug.org.au header.i=@canb.auug.org.au header.b="gRIZIvpG" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727606AbfGHGuv (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jul 2019 02:50:51 -0400 Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org ([203.11.71.1]:50487 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726962AbfGHGuv (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jul 2019 02:50:51 -0400 Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45hx1273ZFz9s8m; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 16:50:46 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=canb.auug.org.au; s=201702; t=1562568647; bh=HAG8N3eVIJQIBBm0rDZ5loK5+K7qbQIbei3kLEglX3Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=gRIZIvpGOhjC+9oIYEd5xhoj+lMX+uN4P4RcVNPDjZOkQSuI91eqyt8ILMLqKufxD u/tN8WfuM+IFSew7wky2WjbEnAP8Hjn/iwcWdn9uwW9Z9HOEkaEDJI0+g7iyrDi/Va Yurqz7u6cZOUkBkXJhkD7WKWDOokU16lwx/2ULvpABJPI342Rb/rp89qqw/65qToNe VGm1dS9xvKOPIgnMwcKbcoXTOiJqaQsfb4MWNw14q58TNBXQyrEiTIFx6Wjkg+LalY unROvkSTV87Kuqh+klNhqSqq0rPZ/mCxahZnvv0zeQsZQPsMkk3qYKmh1zUzAfJNBx 6zbygnlcL+XxQ== Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 16:50:46 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: David Sterba Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Nikolay Borisov Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree Message-ID: <20190708165046.16d2912d@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20190702102832.GP20977@suse.cz> References: <20190702153302.28e7948d@canb.auug.org.au> <20190702102832.GP20977@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/=51/kRi1X.SKH7VyK0k1qaz"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org --Sig_/=51/kRi1X.SKH7VyK0k1qaz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi David, On Tue, 2 Jul 2019 12:28:32 +0200 David Sterba wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 03:33:02PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > >=20 > > After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc > > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this: > >=20 > > fs/btrfs/ctree.c: In function '__tree_mod_log_insert': > > fs/btrfs/ctree.c:388:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'lockde= p_assert_held_exclusive'; did you mean 'lockdep_assert_held_once'? [-Werror= =3Dimplicit-function-declaration] > > lockdep_assert_held_exclusive(&fs_info->tree_mod_log_lock); > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > lockdep_assert_held_once > >=20 > > Caused by commit > >=20 > > 9ffbe8ac05db ("locking/lockdep: Rename lockdep_assert_held_exclusive(= ) -> lockdep_assert_held_write()") > >=20 > > interacting with commits > >=20 > > 84cd7723de7c ("btrfs: assert tree mod log lock in __tree_mod_log_inse= rt") > > 283d2e443505 ("btrfs: assert extent map tree lock in add_extent_mappi= ng") =20 >=20 > I can move the patches out of the for-5.3 branch and send them > separately after the rename gets merged, they're merely adding the > assertion and otherwise do not affect the rest of the code. >=20 > Fixing that in another way would probably need more synchronization > between the branches but I don't think it's necessary in this case. The > next for-next snapshot branch will fix the compilation issue. I see that you removed those commits. The conflict is no more. --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/=51/kRi1X.SKH7VyK0k1qaz Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAl0i58YACgkQAVBC80lX 0GwwBwgApAIOv9IiBrb2huEuk9Ji2QUhgMUMp6OcNTWMj8J4YB/oRCHw8qF+kfEO cEKmDkcfTITyMBwy7EQf3lDsakhNo8znyTVWFWC/58pXsF0X+eKS1gabR2aXNVFK TbVvd/eyRe3los0+1PvwILIrlnu5+7mwxBaaFu+cFKWtRUpk/huCCjrxK4AcBx8F rEowTDq1B+xPxuQPvOU5MnJrBf+oJKyDakzbZU4YWpZacX0pexdcbstnBguTqOJo CYITpeXZ106khP97+q8F5gcWpq6Bs/GDg4cIvHD0rmiAou8r2fyWVrOFnU4cLmmz x8Dg189iR4SC1eiALYtUajZI8KDJyw== =3edz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/=51/kRi1X.SKH7VyK0k1qaz--