Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the drm-misc tree

Jani Nikula
2021-11-05T11:03:54Z

On Fri, 05 Nov 2021, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 19:42:23 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 20:26:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> >
>> > After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm
>> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>> >
>> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c:111:29: error: conflicting types for '__stack_depot_save'
>> > 111 | static depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(void)
>> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> > In file included from include/linux/page_ext.h:7,
>> > from include/linux/mm.h:25,
>> > from include/linux/kallsyms.h:13,
>> > from include/linux/bpf.h:20,
>> > from include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h:5,
>> > from include/linux/cgroup-defs.h:22,
>> > from include/linux/cgroup.h:28,
>> > from include/linux/memcontrol.h:13,
>> > from include/linux/swap.h:9,
>> > from include/linux/suspend.h:5,
>> > from include/linux/regulator/consumer.h:35,
>> > from include/linux/i2c.h:18,
>> > from include/drm/drm_crtc.h:28,
>> > from include/drm/drm_atomic.h:31,
>> > from drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c:24:
>> > include/linux/stackdepot.h:18:22: note: previous declaration of '__stack_depot_save' was here
>> > 18 | depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(unsigned long *entries,
>> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> >
>> > Caused by commit
>> >
>> > cd06ab2fd48f ("drm/locking: add backtrace for locking contended locks without backoff")
>> >
>> > This may only have been revealed because of another fix I have had to
>> > apply today.
>> >
>> > I have applied the following patch for today.
>> >
>> > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>> > Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 20:17:52 +1100
>> > Subject: [PATCH] drm/locking: fix for name conflict
>> >
>> > Fixes: cd06ab2fd48f ("drm/locking: add backtrace for locking contended locks without backoff")
>> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c | 6 +++---
>> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c
>> > index 4d32b61fa1fd..ee36dd20900d 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c
>> > @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@
>> > static DEFINE_WW_CLASS(crtc_ww_class);
>> >
>> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_DEBUG_MODESET_LOCK)
>> > -static noinline depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(void)
>> > +static noinline depot_stack_handle_t __drm_stack_depot_save(void)
>> > {
>> > unsigned long entries[8];
>> > unsigned int n;
>> > @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static void __stack_depot_print(depot_stack_handle_t stack_depot)
>> > kfree(buf);
>> > }
>> > #else /* CONFIG_DRM_DEBUG_MODESET_LOCK */
>> > -static depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(void)
>> > +static depot_stack_handle_t __drm_stack_depot_save(void)
>> > {
>> > return 0;
>> > }
>> > @@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static inline int modeset_lock(struct drm_modeset_lock *lock,
>> > ret = 0;
>> > } else if (ret == -EDEADLK) {
>> > ctx->contended = lock;
>> > - ctx->stack_depot = __stack_depot_save();
>> > + ctx->stack_depot = __drm_stack_depot_save();
>> > }
>> >
>> > return ret;
>>
>> This has reappeared today. I don't know what happened to the drm-misc
>> tree over the weeked :-(
>>
>> I have reapplied the above fix.
>
> So the above drm-misc commit is now in the drm tree, but its fix up
> commit vanished from the drm-misc tree over the past weekend :-(

Cc: drm-misc maintainers.

We normally point drm-misc/for-linux-next at drm-misc-next, *except* to
drm-misc-next-fixes during the merge window. This is because
drm-misc-next already starts accumulating stuff that's headed to one
release later, e.g. currently v5.17. I think that's part of the reason.

I probably should have pushed c4f08d7246a5 ("drm/locking: fix
__stack_depot_* name conflict") to drm-misc-next-fixes.

There's still something funny going on, because the drm-misc-next pull
request [1] isn't part of the drm pull request for v5.16 [2]. Is there
going to be another drm pull?

BR,
Jani.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211014120452.2wicnt6hobu3kbwb@gilmour
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAPM=9tyOyz4_-OdjDduFkponSXycO6maBDFsWGTLv+j=_Vp6ww@mail.gmail.com

--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center