From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EB5D14EC73 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2025 03:57:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761364669; cv=none; b=AlvkrhmQhHrQuYH9zGZ43cvexx7LDLhfwMXzkjxib++H/F6RPkrbg1E5S+jsQSRWeCNiUXBslStvhP83JNMm68ch4240LgeE5n5DVVBY5QgYfPIQ0fFTJKOXmoYfbAhh/4CMw4NUS/yS4VpLi7yOY1RcyXyTdKMGBwoXeiBurlE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761364669; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+S38UXu78bsLPkzk3EJ8m7EJ0/piGsPeJH1dvJKY6lo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=q8/QWMEA5ySHO5V+NSEhdxphYKP7upp1+A/jWMjyU/UvUlJTRzOWvw8Mm6BJFdrZqyq/64aOceqWESd6F8tTeVx987GgRtvyEfdaGIUDSMt4uVjxjM8kUVioDk8nhPvUw1h8QeqRsMxqlMP0qZLHzdJonqg4wXsNYKwARcCiXTA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=O29psYpw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.15 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="O29psYpw" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1761364667; x=1792900667; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=+S38UXu78bsLPkzk3EJ8m7EJ0/piGsPeJH1dvJKY6lo=; b=O29psYpwoomhkQovEKqRnq4QC6BMAUWB2P0BuwDY1wgXCaAnY7d0lLyR Y4JlsBLKL8cJlW1k+2YFlDnq5HEAF8Rssh/S4i8FB/1xLK3Vfh9Vt5a42 LXSuvf7FYXyRxe0HnJwNAqljYWS05AK5tusF69osnvBm2pb2VBpmHVZuF Eb3uLnEJpuCMu65gDEOopa+JSLMrH6WnFUmhUZhUO3tbtzBLmUxcZyMTM fbBk+8fCe0Ftg40lVgYs5KID3gOGhf/KojVhqwMCZdbw8BOBcA2m3CvHW cZHabuaw1qCr3jzpVE2FzYZBtFUlXfM+m/eCH/ChIESIeYyXDePVpFTQm g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: OYcbWHnFTHyx/Rus2vXDXw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: QeckEJ/vQ5+fIcXOdr8z3g== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11586"; a="67185540" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.19,254,1754982000"; d="scan'208";a="67185540" Received: from orviesa002.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.142]) by orvoesa107.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Oct 2025 20:57:47 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Ew51syi8TNiSwTCY4Vh4Dg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: YQCbAsZxSP6oci0PcuBIpA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.19,254,1754982000"; d="scan'208";a="215235669" Received: from lkp-server02.sh.intel.com (HELO 66d7546c76b2) ([10.239.97.151]) by orviesa002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Oct 2025 20:57:46 -0700 Received: from kbuild by 66d7546c76b2 with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vCVPT-000F6h-2W; Sat, 25 Oct 2025 03:57:43 +0000 Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2025 11:56:52 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Alex Markuze Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] ceph: Add BLOG debugfs support Message-ID: <202510251115.DBZzEKsR-lkp@intel.com> References: <20251024084259.2359693-5-amarkuze@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251024084259.2359693-5-amarkuze@redhat.com> Hi Alex, [This is a private test report for your RFC patch.] kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on akpm-mm/mm-nonmm-unstable] [also build test ERROR on tip/sched/core linus/master v6.18-rc2 next-20251024] [cannot apply to ceph-client/testing ceph-client/for-linus] [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#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Alex-Markuze/sched-fork-Wire-BLOG-contexts-into-task-lifecycle/20251024-164832 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-nonmm-unstable patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251024084259.2359693-5-amarkuze%40redhat.com patch subject: [RFC PATCH 4/5] ceph: Add BLOG debugfs support config: xtensa-randconfig-002-20251025 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251025/202510251115.DBZzEKsR-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: xtensa-linux-gcc (GCC) 14.3.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251025/202510251115.DBZzEKsR-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 | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202510251115.DBZzEKsR-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): In file included from include/linux/bits.h:30, from include/linux/ratelimit_types.h:5, from include/linux/ratelimit.h:5, from include/linux/dev_printk.h:16, from include/linux/device.h:15, from fs/ceph/debugfs.c:4: include/linux/blog/blog_ser.h: In function 'write_null_str': >> include/linux/build_bug.h:78:41: error: static assertion failed: "null_str.str size must match unsigned long for proper alignment" 78 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, msg) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:77:34: note: in expansion of macro '__static_assert' 77 | #define static_assert(expr, ...) __static_assert(expr, ##__VA_ARGS__, #expr) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/blog/blog_ser.h:120:9: note: in expansion of macro 'static_assert' 120 | static_assert(sizeof(null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long), | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ fs/ceph/debugfs.c: In function 'ceph_fs_debugfs_cleanup': fs/ceph/debugfs.c:407:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'boutc'; did you mean 'doutc'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 407 | boutc(fsc->client, "begin\n"); | ^~~~~ | doutc vim +78 include/linux/build_bug.h bc6245e5efd70c Ian Abbott 2017-07-10 60 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 61 /** 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 62 * static_assert - check integer constant expression at build time 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 63 * 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 64 * static_assert() is a wrapper for the C11 _Static_assert, with a 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 65 * little macro magic to make the message optional (defaulting to the 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 66 * stringification of the tested expression). 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 67 * 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 68 * Contrary to BUILD_BUG_ON(), static_assert() can be used at global 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 69 * scope, but requires the expression to be an integer constant 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 70 * expression (i.e., it is not enough that __builtin_constant_p() is 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 71 * true for expr). 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 72 * 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 73 * Also note that BUILD_BUG_ON() fails the build if the condition is 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 74 * true, while static_assert() fails the build if the expression is 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 75 * false. 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 76 */ 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 77 #define static_assert(expr, ...) __static_assert(expr, ##__VA_ARGS__, #expr) 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 @78 #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, msg) 6bab69c65013be Rasmus Villemoes 2019-03-07 79 07a368b3f55a79 Maxim Levitsky 2022-10-25 80 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki