From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 6EFB1277016; Mon, 5 May 2025 22:18:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746483520; cv=none; b=Y8v3wmeEwepV4hlkAYWaFCJsoubMOhpV+CE92YFVqnSMUXgp8Z8NH8x2rPL8Bj8YnCK1xrCw3stKMe0exUmoYG++OWRjlKAJ/fYboWdgREsa7PXlFvrC5S275Jh4fcUH02WFTB/P3LpnXPU5Tf1DVlojeoBNgn18RYTykW+cDBk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746483520; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dWHIcRRoe5GGlX+3qUK0a+1fQjWFHJ9VNaoh5l1/ujY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=rMiHIUhzBMmvjFCQhgepPmjaODRM4Ujscbx5q93ILex1iwGanaD4MIOv7KqshHPOslDgrtCYYFdN5256sXNXKcJqcfB/EcSUY0F6kiUgysVyKDQ18ZEenWGaWszC2pbl0kEbqGTwtp7jk1WqKEQzxyZBTJXjUgx6Q8hrXnSgf0o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=abRJUEul; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="abRJUEul" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E384EC4CEF2; Mon, 5 May 2025 22:18:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1746483519; bh=dWHIcRRoe5GGlX+3qUK0a+1fQjWFHJ9VNaoh5l1/ujY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=abRJUEul2HNKot5F9Lfv4vE2/e77bis6fJq4UNz0senWc+VLwFYnM/+7AmB4ZNaRn NXyAUX+b/FRU5JV++wVDlmQakpuI15ttch/99z/VpBTrqK5WENb5tdM5kadJTtaEMY DvR4Lol2Ou630jkpF/wimQp8sCoKhBlPVlhedQCIBhj9qWWTgle2ZwFPaTBh/SvRG7 BBNioLIiO5y8tzJmTc2wgWwwbHPkiJHaor26hVZL/mf8H0Vf+K4M+0wnwwXdRWwaDy jt7AA7k9buXWsB8U/dltA+mcvmriNOka79Wr4dYN6YloAuJW7Ds+z2Fv6V6p6TbEDa 9MkwgJkqySiIQ== From: Sasha Levin To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Mark Harmstone , Qu Wenruo , David Sterba , Sasha Levin , clm@fb.com, josef@toxicpanda.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.14 094/642] btrfs: avoid linker error in btrfs_find_create_tree_block() Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 18:05:10 -0400 Message-Id: <20250505221419.2672473-94-sashal@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 In-Reply-To: <20250505221419.2672473-1-sashal@kernel.org> References: <20250505221419.2672473-1-sashal@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-stable: review X-Patchwork-Hint: Ignore X-stable-base: Linux 6.14.5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Mark Harmstone [ Upstream commit 7ef3cbf17d2734ca66c4ed8573be45f4e461e7ee ] The inline function btrfs_is_testing() is hardcoded to return 0 if CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS is not set. Currently we're relying on the compiler optimizing out the call to alloc_test_extent_buffer() in btrfs_find_create_tree_block(), as it's not been defined (it's behind an #ifdef). Add a stub version of alloc_test_extent_buffer() to avoid linker errors on non-standard optimization levels. This problem was seen on GCC 14 with -O0 and is helps to see symbols that would be otherwise optimized out. Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo Signed-off-by: Mark Harmstone Reviewed-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: David Sterba Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c index b2fae67f8fa34..039a0c36164e9 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c @@ -2842,10 +2842,10 @@ struct extent_buffer *find_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, return eb; } -#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS struct extent_buffer *alloc_test_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, u64 start) { +#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS struct extent_buffer *eb, *exists = NULL; int ret; @@ -2881,8 +2881,11 @@ struct extent_buffer *alloc_test_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, free_eb: btrfs_release_extent_buffer(eb); return exists; -} +#else + /* Stub to avoid linker error when compiled with optimizations turned off. */ + return NULL; #endif +} static struct extent_buffer *grab_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, struct folio *folio) -- 2.39.5