From: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
To: Kundan Kumar <kundan.kumar@samsung.com>
Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] fs: modify writeback infra to work with wb_ctx
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 13:20:11 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202502131333.sRLxAfsk-lkp@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250212103634.448437-3-kundan.kumar@samsung.com>
Hi Kundan,
[This is a private test report for your RFC patch.]
kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
[auto build test ERROR on 57d357a7663c4025c68ae07974b679d84e2d5d1a]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Kundan-Kumar/writeback-add-parallel-writeback-infrastructure/20250212-211021
base: 57d357a7663c4025c68ae07974b679d84e2d5d1a
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250212103634.448437-3-kundan.kumar%40samsung.com
patch subject: [RFC 2/3] fs: modify writeback infra to work with wb_ctx
config: s390-randconfig-001-20250213 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250213/202502131333.sRLxAfsk-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: s390-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250213/202502131333.sRLxAfsk-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502131333.sRLxAfsk-lkp@intel.com/
All error/warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
fs/fs-writeback.c: In function 'inode_cgwb_move_to_attached':
>> fs/fs-writeback.c:1272:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'wb_io_lists_depopulated'; did you mean 'wb_ctx_io_lists_depopulated'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
1272 | wb_io_lists_depopulated(wb);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| wb_ctx_io_lists_depopulated
fs/fs-writeback.c: In function 'bdi_split_work_to_wbs':
>> fs/fs-writeback.c:1309:17: error: implicit declaration of function 'wb_queue_work'; did you mean 'queue_work'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
1309 | wb_queue_work(&bdi->wb, base_work);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
| queue_work
fs/fs-writeback.c: In function 'requeue_inode_ctx':
>> fs/fs-writeback.c:1712:25: error: implicit declaration of function 'inode_cgwb_move_to_attached_ctx'; did you mean 'inode_cgwb_move_to_attached'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
1712 | inode_cgwb_move_to_attached_ctx(inode, wb, p_wb_ctx);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| inode_cgwb_move_to_attached
fs/fs-writeback.c: At top level:
>> fs/fs-writeback.c:210:13: warning: 'wb_ctx_queue_work' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
210 | static void wb_ctx_queue_work(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
vim +1272 fs/fs-writeback.c
7fc5854f8c6efa Tejun Heo 2017-12-12 1262
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1263 static void inode_cgwb_move_to_attached(struct inode *inode,
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1264 struct bdi_writeback *wb)
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1265 {
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1266 assert_spin_locked(&wb->list_lock);
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1267 assert_spin_locked(&inode->i_lock);
a9438b44bc7015 Jan Kara 2022-12-12 1268 WARN_ON_ONCE(inode->i_state & I_FREEING);
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1269
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1270 inode->i_state &= ~I_SYNC_QUEUED;
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1271 list_del_init(&inode->i_io_list);
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 @1272 wb_io_lists_depopulated(wb);
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1273 }
f3b6a6df38aa51 Roman Gushchin 2021-06-28 1274
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1275 static struct bdi_writeback *
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1276 locked_inode_to_wb_and_lock_list(struct inode *inode)
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1277 __releases(&inode->i_lock)
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1278 __acquires(&wb->list_lock)
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1279 {
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1280 struct bdi_writeback *wb = inode_to_wb(inode);
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1281
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1282 spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1283 spin_lock(&wb->list_lock);
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1284 return wb;
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1285 }
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1286
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1287 static struct bdi_writeback *inode_to_wb_and_lock_list(struct inode *inode)
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1288 __acquires(&wb->list_lock)
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1289 {
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1290 struct bdi_writeback *wb = inode_to_wb(inode);
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1291
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1292 spin_lock(&wb->list_lock);
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1293 return wb;
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1294 }
87e1d789bf55b1 Tejun Heo 2015-05-28 1295
f2b65121607631 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1296 static long wb_split_bdi_pages(struct bdi_writeback *wb, long nr_pages)
f2b65121607631 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1297 {
f2b65121607631 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1298 return nr_pages;
f2b65121607631 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1299 }
f2b65121607631 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1300
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1301 static void bdi_split_work_to_wbs(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1302 struct wb_writeback_work *base_work,
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1303 bool skip_if_busy)
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1304 {
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1305 might_sleep();
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1306
006a0973ed020a Tejun Heo 2015-08-25 1307 if (!skip_if_busy || !writeback_in_progress(&bdi->wb)) {
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1308 base_work->auto_free = 0;
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 @1309 wb_queue_work(&bdi->wb, base_work);
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1310 }
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1311 }
db125360409fc3 Tejun Heo 2015-05-22 1312
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-13 5:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20250212104507epcas5p18722b26bd022151979418508eae99065@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2025-02-12 10:36 ` [RFC 0/3] Parallelizing filesystem writeback Kundan Kumar
2025-02-12 10:36 ` [RFC 1/3] writeback: add parallel writeback infrastructure Kundan Kumar
2025-02-12 10:36 ` [RFC 2/3] fs: modify writeback infra to work with wb_ctx Kundan Kumar
2025-02-13 5:20 ` kernel test robot [this message]
2025-02-13 5:30 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-13 6:15 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-12 10:36 ` [RFC 3/3] xfs: use the parallel writeback infra per AG Kundan Kumar
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=202502131333.sRLxAfsk-lkp@intel.com \
--to=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=kundan.kumar@samsung.com \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
/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.