From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.19]) (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 BE669246BCD; Sat, 25 Oct 2025 07:14:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761376470; cv=none; b=MbGrOdjOod+ESZri7g0n8tPL4Qhy4SXrpzCnUIFuICbia4yY1K7pgBNV4p4w4QZdpo40zf6E5E0grYHH151kYolvZwZ7Dl/pzqcPV6n12C8HcysmUy7W2bQR3Px8JAcFAMvmUOavEep8a1S41XunnTWPhI9Pg5BvdxynTcDguCs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761376470; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AyUgepfktzp1wJZD1q1pD1rzx8Gq9MNvCmVh5e0vsik=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=nhQ17r8ojc/tbZ9nGMP2kU6RY5st7twGvs/IdD4D9S6EU5ZtYkGtgUHGqVzgJHK3olE8dx5TVgXazhV2tXWUPM4k55NuAagKNv8JvOdqH6QQIuSUucCxsSIE2h6EHwVHibm5gheI+4BM+ET7vzEcO13EPyL7/xCJD8swI8p4Pws= 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=CQB9kUmv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 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="CQB9kUmv" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1761376468; x=1792912468; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=AyUgepfktzp1wJZD1q1pD1rzx8Gq9MNvCmVh5e0vsik=; b=CQB9kUmv9PJukt98v3bMl3NS7ikTWVJOVDb757XauIo09uafDiIJGqxv +d0xgHq4IMDoXDAfWIru9+XUHXVk7Ggx3O6KZnmBCcuHx/pGJztCUplfI ZX1X4Z+n6LvLQduVnbg0WeS1OUHjLrUrdMHRkAOCy2jsYJyfgHGYzQ1x/ /D0VGtQiqfvo1KvKJNVVUsE7pEkTZiGeO/vSMmlmDW59m31VBdbbZDJDw c+sKPVRazETkJvU6KBeHmxkp/ZJ43pyDMUVJLBbnkP9K7/Dk8EPHqURh1 JmaaqjqNy5krzj+SVdrKP6gaHe2ucF+0Z5gf5M7coR9MSqtaE2BuExojC w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 0x5xUtYiRga1rUnlacWXBA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: LKZE/xDITFOoHlzLjmkwBQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11586"; a="62574485" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.19,254,1754982000"; d="scan'208";a="62574485" Received: from fmviesa009.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.149]) by fmvoesa113.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Oct 2025 00:14:28 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: EMhiLWf+S92+V2bQGK49Aw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 258aGUe3QqmZ6/MAVfpxgQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.19,254,1754982000"; d="scan'208";a="185084314" Received: from lkp-server02.sh.intel.com (HELO 66d7546c76b2) ([10.239.97.151]) by fmviesa009.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Oct 2025 00:14:27 -0700 Received: from kbuild by 66d7546c76b2 with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vCYTp-000FAX-0E; Sat, 25 Oct 2025 07:14:25 +0000 Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2025 15:14:08 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Alex Markuze Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] ceph: Add BLOG debugfs support Message-ID: <202510251449.dXsrM1va-lkp@intel.com> References: <20251024084259.2359693-5-amarkuze@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@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: i386-buildonly-randconfig-005-20251025 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251025/202510251449.dXsrM1va-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: clang version 20.1.8 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 87f0227cb60147a26a1eeb4fb06e3b505e9c7261) reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251025/202510251449.dXsrM1va-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/202510251449.dXsrM1va-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): In file included from fs/ceph/debugfs.c:23: In file included from include/linux/ceph/ceph_blog.h:10: In file included from include/linux/blog/blog.h:17: >> include/linux/blog/blog_ser.h:120:16: error: static assertion failed due to requirement 'sizeof (null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long)': null_str.str size must match unsigned long for proper alignment 120 | static_assert(sizeof(null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long), | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:77:50: note: expanded from macro 'static_assert' 77 | #define static_assert(expr, ...) __static_assert(expr, ##__VA_ARGS__, #expr) | ^~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:78:56: note: expanded from macro '__static_assert' 78 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, msg) | ^~~~ include/linux/blog/blog_ser.h:120:37: note: expression evaluates to '8 == 4' 120 | static_assert(sizeof(null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long), | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:77:50: note: expanded from macro 'static_assert' 77 | #define static_assert(expr, ...) __static_assert(expr, ##__VA_ARGS__, #expr) | ^~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:78:56: note: expanded from macro '__static_assert' 78 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, msg) | ^~~~ fs/ceph/debugfs.c:407:2: error: call to undeclared function 'boutc'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 407 | boutc(fsc->client, "begin\n"); | ^ fs/ceph/debugfs.c:429:2: error: call to undeclared function 'boutc'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 429 | boutc(fsc->client, "begin\n"); | ^ 3 errors generated. -- In file included from debugfs.c:23: In file included from include/linux/ceph/ceph_blog.h:10: In file included from include/linux/blog/blog.h:17: >> include/linux/blog/blog_ser.h:120:16: error: static assertion failed due to requirement 'sizeof (null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long)': null_str.str size must match unsigned long for proper alignment 120 | static_assert(sizeof(null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long), | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:77:50: note: expanded from macro 'static_assert' 77 | #define static_assert(expr, ...) __static_assert(expr, ##__VA_ARGS__, #expr) | ^~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:78:56: note: expanded from macro '__static_assert' 78 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, msg) | ^~~~ include/linux/blog/blog_ser.h:120:37: note: expression evaluates to '8 == 4' 120 | static_assert(sizeof(null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long), | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:77:50: note: expanded from macro 'static_assert' 77 | #define static_assert(expr, ...) __static_assert(expr, ##__VA_ARGS__, #expr) | ^~~~ include/linux/build_bug.h:78:56: note: expanded from macro '__static_assert' 78 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, msg) | ^~~~ debugfs.c:407:2: error: call to undeclared function 'boutc'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 407 | boutc(fsc->client, "begin\n"); | ^ debugfs.c:429:2: error: call to undeclared function 'boutc'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit function declarations [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] 429 | boutc(fsc->client, "begin\n"); | ^ 3 errors generated. vim +120 include/linux/blog/blog_ser.h 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 116 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 117 static inline size_t write_null_str(char *dst) 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 118 { 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 119 *(union null_str_u *)dst = null_str; 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 @120 static_assert(sizeof(null_str.str) == sizeof(unsigned long), 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 121 "null_str.str size must match unsigned long for proper alignment"); 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 122 return __builtin_strlen(null_str.str); 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 123 } 8ffa1efe9718cb Alex Markuze 2025-10-24 124 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki