From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 230BCC43381 for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 21:42:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBC71218A1 for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 21:42:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726314AbfCOVmJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:42:09 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:59200 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725959AbfCOVmI (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:42:08 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8E8AEE1; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 21:42:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ds.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 10065) id 799ECDACEC; Fri, 15 Mar 2019 22:43:24 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 22:43:24 +0100 From: David Sterba To: kbuild test robot Cc: kbuild-all@01.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] btrfs: use assertion helpers for spinning readers Message-ID: <20190315214324.GD3516@suse.cz> Reply-To: dsterba@suse.cz Mail-Followup-To: dsterba@suse.cz, kbuild test robot , kbuild-all@01.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org References: <201903160031.tA3xYCpn%lkp@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201903160031.tA3xYCpn%lkp@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 12:18:30AM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote: > Hi David, > > I love your patch! Yet something to improve: > > [auto build test ERROR on kdave/for-next] > [also build test ERROR on next-20190306] > [cannot apply to v5.0] > [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] > > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/David-Sterba/Extent-buffer-locking-cleanups/20190315-231346 > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kdave/linux.git for-next > config: i386-randconfig-x011-201910 (attached as .config) > compiler: gcc-7 (Debian 7.3.0-1) 7.3.0 > reproduce: > # save the attached .config to linux build tree > make ARCH=i386 > > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): > > fs/btrfs/locking.c: In function 'btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_read': > >> fs/btrfs/locking.c:97:18: error: 'struct extent_buffer' has no member named 'spinning_readers'; did you mean 'blocking_readers'? > atomic_inc(&eb->spinning_readers); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > blocking_readers > > vim +97 fs/btrfs/locking.c > > b4ce94de Chris Mason 2009-02-04 85 > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 86 void btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_read(struct extent_buffer *eb) > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 87 { > b4ce94de Chris Mason 2009-02-04 88 /* > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 89 * No lock is required. The lock owner may change if we have a read > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 90 * lock, but it won't change to or away from us. If we have the write > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 91 * lock, we are the owner and it'll never change. > b4ce94de Chris Mason 2009-02-04 92 */ > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 93 if (eb->lock_nested && current->pid == eb->lock_owner) > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 94 return; > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 95 BUG_ON(atomic_read(&eb->blocking_readers) == 0); > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 96 read_lock(&eb->lock); > aa12c027 David Sterba 2018-04-04 @97 atomic_inc(&eb->spinning_readers); Thanks for the report. There's the right code in my branch that compiles (and also got tested), with and without the config option, so I must have sent branch with the uncommited fixup.