From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f70.google.com (mail-pg0-f70.google.com [74.125.83.70]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97EA06B0696 for ; Fri, 18 May 2018 18:10:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pg0-f70.google.com with SMTP id k1-v6so3231842pgq.20 for ; Fri, 18 May 2018 15:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org. [140.211.169.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 33-v6si8390872plt.596.2018.05.18.15.10.05 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 18 May 2018 15:10:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 15:10:00 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [mmotm:master 149/199] lib/idr.c:583:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'xa_lock_irqsave'; did you mean 'read_lock_irqsave'? Message-Id: <20180518151000.93517f28f3338bb39f558a90@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <201805190415.2D1H4m65%fengguang.wu@intel.com> References: <201805190415.2D1H4m65%fengguang.wu@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: kbuild test robot Cc: Matthew Wilcox , kbuild-all@01.org, Johannes Weiner , Linux Memory Management List On Sat, 19 May 2018 04:21:17 +0800 kbuild test robot wrote: > tree: git://git.cmpxchg.org/linux-mmotm.git master > head: 7400fc6942aefa2e009272d0e118284f110c5088 > commit: d5f90621ff2af7f139b01b7bcf8649a91665965e [149/199] lib/idr.c: remove simple_ida_lock > config: x86_64-randconfig-i0-201819 (attached as .config) > compiler: gcc-7 (Debian 7.3.0-16) 7.3.0 > reproduce: > git checkout d5f90621ff2af7f139b01b7bcf8649a91665965e > # save the attached .config to linux build tree > make ARCH=x86_64 > > Note: the mmotm/master HEAD 7400fc6942aefa2e009272d0e118284f110c5088 builds fine. > It only hurts bisectibility. > I'm a bit surprised we're seeing this. ida-remove-simple_ida_lock.patch introduces this error, and the very next patch ida-remove-simple_ida_lock-fix.patch fixes it. I'm pretty sure that the robot software is capable of detecting this situation and ignoring the error. Did that code get broken?