From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] locking/rwlocks: introduce write_lock_nested
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 11:50:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202111201111.c2ApGeHR-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211115185909.3949505-8-minchan@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7106 bytes --]
Hi Minchan,
I love your patch! Yet something to improve:
[auto build test ERROR on tip/master]
[also build test ERROR on linux/master linus/master v5.16-rc1]
[cannot apply to hnaz-mm/master tip/locking/core next-20211118]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Minchan-Kim/zsmalloc-remove-bit_spin_lock/20211116-030720
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git 8ab774587903771821b59471cc723bba6d893942
config: nds32-randconfig-r003-20211115 (attached as .config)
compiler: nds32le-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
# https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/c24db750268d85953fe12742e6e4a7b8baf16623
git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
git fetch --no-tags linux-review Minchan-Kim/zsmalloc-remove-bit_spin_lock/20211116-030720
git checkout c24db750268d85953fe12742e6e4a7b8baf16623
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-11.2.0 make.cross ARCH=nds32
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 >>):
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:68:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
68 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:80:26: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock_irqsave' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
80 | unsigned long __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:98:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock_irq' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
98 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irq(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:103:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock_bh' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
103 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_bh(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:68:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
68 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:80:26: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock_irqsave' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
80 | unsigned long __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:98:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock_irq' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
98 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irq(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:103:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock_bh' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
103 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_bh(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:68:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
68 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:80:26: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock_irqsave' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
80 | unsigned long __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:98:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock_irq' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
98 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irq(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:103:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock_bh' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
103 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_bh(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c: In function '_raw_write_lock_nested':
>> kernel/locking/spinlock.c:306:9: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_write_lock_nested'; did you mean '_raw_write_lock_nested'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
306 | __raw_write_lock_nested(lock, subclass);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| _raw_write_lock_nested
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
vim +306 kernel/locking/spinlock.c
303
304 void __lockfunc _raw_write_lock_nested(rwlock_t *lock, int subclass)
305 {
> 306 __raw_write_lock_nested(lock, subclass);
307 }
308 EXPORT_SYMBOL(_raw_write_lock_nested);
309 #endif
310
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all(a)lists.01.org
[-- Attachment #2: config.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 35183 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] locking/rwlocks: introduce write_lock_nested
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 11:50:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202111201111.c2ApGeHR-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211115185909.3949505-8-minchan@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6980 bytes --]
Hi Minchan,
I love your patch! Yet something to improve:
[auto build test ERROR on tip/master]
[also build test ERROR on linux/master linus/master v5.16-rc1]
[cannot apply to hnaz-mm/master tip/locking/core next-20211118]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Minchan-Kim/zsmalloc-remove-bit_spin_lock/20211116-030720
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git 8ab774587903771821b59471cc723bba6d893942
config: nds32-randconfig-r003-20211115 (attached as .config)
compiler: nds32le-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
# https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/c24db750268d85953fe12742e6e4a7b8baf16623
git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
git fetch --no-tags linux-review Minchan-Kim/zsmalloc-remove-bit_spin_lock/20211116-030720
git checkout c24db750268d85953fe12742e6e4a7b8baf16623
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-11.2.0 make.cross ARCH=nds32
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 >>):
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:68:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
68 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:80:26: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock_irqsave' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
80 | unsigned long __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:98:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock_irq' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
98 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irq(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:103:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_spin_lock_bh' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
103 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_bh(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:126:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
126 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(spin, raw_spinlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:68:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
68 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:80:26: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock_irqsave' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
80 | unsigned long __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:98:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock_irq' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
98 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irq(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:103:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_read_lock_bh' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
103 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_bh(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:129:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
129 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(read, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:68:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
68 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:80:26: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock_irqsave' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
80 | unsigned long __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irqsave(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:98:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock_irq' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
98 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_irq(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:103:17: warning: no previous prototype for '__raw_write_lock_bh' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
103 | void __lockfunc __raw_##op##_lock_bh(locktype##_t *lock) \
| ^~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c:130:1: note: in expansion of macro 'BUILD_LOCK_OPS'
130 | BUILD_LOCK_OPS(write, rwlock);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/locking/spinlock.c: In function '_raw_write_lock_nested':
>> kernel/locking/spinlock.c:306:9: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_write_lock_nested'; did you mean '_raw_write_lock_nested'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
306 | __raw_write_lock_nested(lock, subclass);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| _raw_write_lock_nested
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
vim +306 kernel/locking/spinlock.c
303
304 void __lockfunc _raw_write_lock_nested(rwlock_t *lock, int subclass)
305 {
> 306 __raw_write_lock_nested(lock, subclass);
307 }
308 EXPORT_SYMBOL(_raw_write_lock_nested);
309 #endif
310
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
[-- Attachment #2: .config.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 35183 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-20 3:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-15 18:59 [PATCH v2 0/9] zsmalloc: remove bit_spin_lock Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] zsmalloc: introduce some helper functions Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] zsmalloc: rename zs_stat_type to class_stat_type Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] zsmalloc: decouple class actions from zspage works Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] zsmalloc: introduce obj_allocated Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] zsmalloc: move huge compressed obj from page to zspage Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] zsmalloc: remove zspage isolation for migration Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] locking/rwlocks: introduce write_lock_nested Minchan Kim
2021-11-16 10:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-19 10:35 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-11-19 18:21 ` Minchan Kim
2021-11-20 15:38 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-11-20 3:50 ` kernel test robot [this message]
2021-11-20 3:50 ` kernel test robot
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] zsmalloc: replace per zpage lock with pool->migrate_lock Minchan Kim
2021-11-15 18:59 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] zsmalloc: replace get_cpu_var with local_lock Minchan Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202111201111.c2ApGeHR-lkp@intel.com \
--to=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.