From: Bryan Schumaker <bjschuma@netapp.com>
To: "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: "Schumaker, Bryan" <Bryan.Schumaker@netapp.com>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
"kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org"
<kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:44:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5017E13F.4030909@netapp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1343741622.519.2.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
On 07/31/2012 09:33 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:30 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>> On 07/31/2012 09:05 AM, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>> On 07/31/2012 08:55 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:47 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>>>> On 07/30/2012 11:14 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>>>> Bryan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
>>>>>
>>>>> IS_ENABLED() will check for CONFIG_NFS_V*_MODULE, last I checked the defined() macro doesn't. Putting this into a separate patch makes the change non-bisectable since gcc will be checking against CONFIG_NFS_V3 but CONFIG_NFS_V3_MODULE is set. Should I have changed the CONFIG_ variables instead of using IS_ENABLED()?
>>>>
>>>> Why is it evaluating differently in the include file vs. the .c file?
>>>> Are we missing an include in nfs_fs.h?
>>>
>>> Good question. I don't see any reason that it would evaluate differently, but I'm compiling the .config attached to the initial email to try to figure it out.
>>>
>>
>> Looks like the IS_ENABLED() switch got pushed to the next patch for V3 in include/linux/nfs_fs.h. Want me to resend the patches? I took another look at how IS_ENABLED() is defined, and it'll work if I do the switch in the patch before I turn everything into separate modules if you want me to resend everything.
>
> Please just make it incremental to the patch series that is already
> merged in today's nfs-for-3.6.
Easy enough, the patch that fixes it is the last one in the series that I sent in yesterday.
>
> Cheers
> Trond
>
>>> - Bryan
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:fengguang.wu@intel.com]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
>>>>>>> To: Schumaker, Bryan
>>>>>>> Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
>>>>>>> nfs@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>>> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
>>>>>>> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Bryan,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kernel build failed on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
>>>>>>> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>>>>>>> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
>>>>>>> v3 into a module
>>>>>>> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All related error/warning messages:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
>>>>>>> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>> was here
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
>>>>>>> 1589 return status;
>>>>>>> 1590 }
>>>>>>> 1591
>>>>>>>> 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
>>>>>>> 1593 {
>>>>>>> 1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
>>>>>>> 1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
>>>>>>> Fengguang Wu <wfg@linux.intel.com> Intel Corporation
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-31 13:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-31 2:43 [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode' Fengguang Wu
2012-07-31 3:14 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-07-31 12:47 ` Bryan Schumaker
2012-07-31 12:55 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-07-31 13:05 ` Bryan Schumaker
2012-07-31 13:30 ` Bryan Schumaker
2012-07-31 13:33 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-07-31 13:44 ` Bryan Schumaker [this message]
2012-07-31 13:51 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-07-31 13:55 ` Bryan Schumaker
2012-07-31 14:16 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-07-31 14:18 ` Bryan Schumaker
2012-07-31 13:58 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-07-31 14:08 ` Bryan Schumaker
2012-07-31 14:10 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-07-31 14:28 ` Myklebust, Trond
2012-07-31 14:36 ` Fengguang Wu
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=5017E13F.4030909@netapp.com \
--to=bjschuma@netapp.com \
--cc=Bryan.Schumaker@netapp.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).