Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the akpm-current tree

Zi Yan
2017-08-01T13:08:09Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3171 bytes --]

Hi Stephen,

I found two possible fixes.

1. This uses C++ zero initializer, GCC is OK with it.
I tested with GCC 4.9.3 (has the initialization bug) and GCC 6.4.0.

--- a/include/linux/swapops.h~a
+++ a/include/linux/swapops.h
@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ static inline swp_entry_t pmd_to_swp_ent

static inline pmd_t swp_entry_to_pmd(swp_entry_t entry)
{
- return (pmd_t){ 0 };
+ return (pmd_t){};
}

static inline int is_pmd_migration_entry(pmd_t pmd)

2. This is ugly but working.
It works with GCC 4.9.3 and GCC 6.4.0.

--- a/include/linux/swapops.h
+++ b/include/linux/swapops.h
@@ -219,7 +219,10 @@ static inline swp_entry_t pmd_to_swp_entry(pmd_t pmd)

static inline pmd_t swp_entry_to_pmd(swp_entry_t entry)
{
- return (pmd_t){ 0 };
+ pmd_t e;
+ memset(&e, 0, sizeof(pmd_t));
+ return e;
}

static inline int is_pmd_migration_entry(pmd_t pmd)

—
Best Regards,
Yan Zi

On 1 Aug 2017, at 7:30, Zi Yan wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
>
> The warning after removing __pmd() is caused by a gcc bug: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53119
> so (pmd_t) {0} causes warning in some GCC versions.
>
> __pmd() is defined in alpha, arm, arm64, frv, ia64, m32r, m68k, microblaze, mips, parisc,
> powerpc, s390, sh, sparc, tile, um, x86, and asm-generic, according to
> http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/ident/__pmd
>
> I am not sure about whether arc, blackfin, c6x, cris, h8300, hexagon, metag, mn10300, nios2, score,
> xtensa use __pmd() in asm-generic or not.
>
> I am looking for other workarounds for this warning now.
>
>
> —
> Best Regards,
> Yan Zi
>
> On 1 Aug 2017, at 6:50, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 16:39:04 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (sparc defconfig)
>>> failed like this:
>>>
>>> In file included from mm/vmscan.c:55:0:
>>> include/linux/swapops.h: In function 'swp_entry_to_pmd':
>>> include/linux/swapops.h:226:9: error: implicit declaration of function '__pmd' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> return __pmd(0);
>>> ^
>>> include/linux/swapops.h:226:9: error: incompatible types when returning type 'int' but 'pmd_t {aka struct <anonymous>}' was expected
>>>
>>> Caused by commit
>>>
>>> 9bb18490758c ("mm-thp-enable-thp-migration-in-generic-path-fix")
>>>
>>> It looks like sparc 32 bit has no __pmd() ...
>>>
>>> I have reverted that commit for today.
>>
>> OK, that is a pain as it causes many build warnings some of which are
>> treated as errors :-( (see e.g.
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fkisskb.ellerman.id.au%2Fkisskb%2Fbuildresult%2F13112192%2F&data=02%7C01%7Czi.yan%40cs.rutgers.edu%7Cbf7a7ad57ad04505172f08d4d8cb31c5%7Cb92d2b234d35447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636371814609835949&sdata=diTid245prNY3Jy1pPEaL5q8dSBifFVzliKRq54fXhk%3D&reserved=0). So maybe
>> we need to fix sthe sparc32 build instead? Are there any other
>> architectures/platforms that do not define __pmd() ?
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 496 bytes --]