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 1566E30497A; Fri, 31 Oct 2025 20:37:51 +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=1761943072; cv=none; b=GXvZlyzTc5WIC32DobphOsl6UIac6SPC8I+n4oUClSJPC63CeoSPvR/JOHUOuCk8wJlRfAb5tizdZIA1KSPjKA8VpPrn7lbBFe+RT6MsUQ5c9bOSTM/+VTUtsMA1w9lPZKDSJkVLOfisQXLLR7aUJQ8LDi+1QSuYzS3XwyPGl+U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761943072; c=relaxed/simple; bh=06p3NygxEpzTyI9vzctkNxGfa/fJn/Y5U5F4DP7lLu4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FN3VZnH2f/N+3hrDsl38FyjgKBR4eNyDZ6/8ZKArIDncJ+RKZmiPwEBZxeLa94aP8VT48Mm78Rqh7/Se/RoA0QgQAwoT54n1an5JMLK5kJhWC6IYepmCJDyPj41Fp+IQQh4U5a1M0+Wk72rkZRpFA1ez2G7VcIbyTX5HK4masDc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=oTVNVGmd; 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="oTVNVGmd" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9ABCC4CEE7; Fri, 31 Oct 2025 20:37:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1761943071; bh=06p3NygxEpzTyI9vzctkNxGfa/fJn/Y5U5F4DP7lLu4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=oTVNVGmd+tbuj/k9c5IhGeEZh6E2dxZN+wP3B0vnwUaDnQbmwUoDQ/KdCZjRYTwRm 7ohmIPyqtROUs9kfyD9L20WXyWq+KfXGtHmi/tih9LiZccsxWnwxNNaMyKi2ZNvDTk fVAxuzVSPflmTsSsEow0r6JBSrEGeklMRx2punr+Chk59Ka7Fpkm3OeTltcuXyb8Wu VBlnh0dIixICrv7topusConPHLKSBt5r9+Hy8KzaFwUYs4zzYxSX7wZNIqIWqZhonH 3Nw2RH2/W9M11+y5+0XHDpiK+LjG4zLCpnzp48v9liZ0qsqW2GNoTdsKM/4cFYiUDv O7fO36/2kLttA== Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 16:37:46 -0400 From: Nathan Chancellor To: kernel test robot Cc: Gladyshev Ilya , llvm@lists.linux.dev, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, Chris Mason , David Sterba , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: make ASSERT no-op in release builds Message-ID: <20251031203746.GE2486902@ax162> References: <20251030182322.4085697-1-foxido@foxido.dev> <202510311956.w2iYoQcn-lkp@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <202510311956.w2iYoQcn-lkp@intel.com> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 08:18:50PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > Hi Gladyshev, > > kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: > > [auto build test WARNING on e53642b87a4f4b03a8d7e5f8507fc3cd0c595ea6] > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Gladyshev-Ilya/btrfs-make-ASSERT-no-op-in-release-builds/20251031-024059 > base: e53642b87a4f4b03a8d7e5f8507fc3cd0c595ea6 > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251030182322.4085697-1-foxido%40foxido.dev > patch subject: [PATCH] btrfs: make ASSERT no-op in release builds > config: x86_64-kexec (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251031/202510311956.w2iYoQcn-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/20251031/202510311956.w2iYoQcn-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/202510311956.w2iYoQcn-lkp@intel.com/ > > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): > > >> fs/btrfs/raid56.c:302:13: warning: function 'full_page_sectors_uptodate' is not needed and will not be emitted [-Wunneeded-internal-declaration] > 302 | static bool full_page_sectors_uptodate(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio, > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 1 warning generated. Just in case it is not obvious: full_page_sectors_uptodate() is only called within an ASSERT() macro, so after this change, it is only referenced within sizeof(), so it won't be emitted in .text (which may be a bug). Presumably that is expected in this case, so I would recommend marking this as __maybe_unused to avoid the warning. Cheers, Nathan