From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (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 8D2B61BD9D3; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745994478; cv=none; b=hSbQTWmPZ4T8fpmrbvkxMULsei8t39Fl4N0uHYLD4IntjF5AI5DdsqTJKdv8z71mO7IOKck1aYT5np3qn/5hLI3p3srsnqtrShFI3Hdasq6uDChJhastjfeCryFfK4wJoyTmWcOQjisndZoOOa6AWi4lapOMZgrqzskEGYfiA9A= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745994478; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9xLnkVVuPU4cJNsZgsMdEOkOHPFGVy9pfaGGnE2G7Ck=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=PdcY5dtz04mXBwnR0W+UttyfN9PvdXxbG8q89hNp7vC1NPxaV+l4tHRKxXQ99ZrjEri5GC0siBbVrlzowl/3I5KY2MCM+pVJYeV+17eLwLZ7iC1HRug/B9CvQP+2pWH32nzzxWlt76WKvGkz1+FrrS04ppOiGfiwn+kCr13j27E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=YTdqY5xz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.156.1 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="YTdqY5xz" Received: from pps.filterd (m0353729.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 53TLc7sl016556; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:20 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=owqRKj YUV8ODqQZRc7A2CXHmnHz+pAhBNwwk/L5Gaf4=; b=YTdqY5xzIdUetOB4nAq/IJ 1rPlpHhXzS7FaVI5TIQBKdiKHWAavUKPsEHxBdmaoUW5VkRAGiqibQOhsYcmni9G 4POhpUSd6rTw+HsV2D9SkZV1xpPohwHf29HMvRknPnSpjNdzGPSVQ4kWQyUVda3V WuSfRUzmIxAM5mOwsgofHiy3Fzf6F8b6PQjEhSoK7U4fRSUNs2fpWgfl4zbXGp+b l5pcCq3e92dqrkKCHupyzf7/3zdQ9twmu2nFjIuj3VW8ZDKHes7pVZxG1REr+5/s hc05yLJqcbpGq32D9rM5Lq6YNasWHut5JuXpYIySEmTl4xmjGnXV7/3xvsLR4B8Q == Received: from ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5d.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.93]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 46b6uphgpe-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 53U3U6aQ001893; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:18 GMT Received: from smtprelay07.dal12v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.9]) by ppma23.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 469bampkcr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:18 +0000 Received: from smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [10.39.53.229]) by smtprelay07.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 53U6RHer31195778 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:17 GMT Received: from smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 473195805C; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D41E58058; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.61.255.15] (unknown [9.61.255.15]) by smtpav02.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 06:27:14 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <562a79d1-e8a4-4d8f-a576-47c017aadf93@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:57:12 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [linux-next]Build Failure: kernel/watchdog.c:936:2: error: too many arguments From: Venkat Rao Bagalkote To: Stephen Rothwell , luogengkun@huaweicloud.com, Andrew Morton Cc: Madhavan Srinivasan , LKML , Linux Next Mailing List , dianders@chromium.org, joel.granados@kernel.org, song@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner References: <339e2b3e-c7ee-418f-a84c-9c6360dc570b@linux.ibm.com> <20250428084117.31215b8c@canb.auug.org.au> <33aabaae-5789-4b67-bd06-06b79d03ea38@linux.ibm.com> Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: <33aabaae-5789-4b67-bd06-06b79d03ea38@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=IqQecK/g c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6811c2c7 cx=c_pps a=3Bg1Hr4SwmMryq2xdFQyZA==:117 a=3Bg1Hr4SwmMryq2xdFQyZA==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=XR8D0OoHHMoA:10 a=VwQbUJbxAAAA:8 a=VnNF1IyMAAAA:8 a=Dc_VTNDoBUFHScTmsKMA:9 a=3ZKOabzyN94A:10 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: EWBJLxJ1VR9J5isIcIK1I8etVbMBNCgT X-Proofpoint-GUID: EWBJLxJ1VR9J5isIcIK1I8etVbMBNCgT X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjUwNDMwMDA0MSBTYWx0ZWRfX8sfSbPR6H1ey FeeKgcmua5Lu+z85byeUDJ/u/hAt7Up0jmjw1FWpZ9AG8DxRIhRsr/nkbZ1Kkgu9t6EoIFKVIMV vGCxAdDi/slBwmQvJMwUI9MBGbpJ9y8XPzeYFH1CxmbyMd2L1LR60tqgyx6pVWvhhCFwgFq4jGS LpgG/HxrJwhcnhLTIehaPxjEBzv64slxCVZUhxVXt9WLLAUTgkU9kLQezqWPF8JYnORfhb9f5Q+ e/SeLGxKIl4QitXWWdaL4w6CziPtllIbNerMlpmko8y98Ixo86Gg7Z7K8CZ1+xHxIyeiFkTnuwu Inq1gCmJVPCNfatR9LgsGpcTs03K2rVpjPvQR2J2w5ZowvjT3n5q8Rm6Pmg3R8lMm8tlwYqbjQN OjbPWOFXeRiuOQXmpktp+KHLACvWZ6u2kcGMGPwhsYR8glZYX1BJhagI8NEy/35O0UPTcYmB X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1099,Hydra:6.0.736,FMLib:17.12.80.40 definitions=2025-04-30_01,2025-04-24_02,2025-02-21_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam authscore=0 authtc=n/a authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2504070000 definitions=main-2504300041 On 28/04/25 3:11 pm, Venkat Rao Bagalkote wrote: > > On 28/04/25 4:11 am, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 20:39:26 +0530 Venkat Rao Bagalkote >> wrote: >>> I am observing below build failure on IBM Power8 server with >>> linux-next-20250424 repo. >>> >>> This issue seems to be introduced by the below commit. After >>> reverting the below commit, kernel build is successful. >>> >>> Bad Commit: 6b07f9a0fa41 watchdog: fix watchdog may detect false >>> positive of softlockup >>> >>> Note: To hit this issue, one should first resolve this [1] >>> >>> >>> Repo: >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git >>> Branch: master >>> GCC: 8.5.0 20210514 >>> ldd (GNU libc) 2.28 >>> >>> Attached is the .config file. >>> >>> Errors: >>> >>> kernel/watchdog.c: In function 'lockup_detector_reconfigure': >>> kernel/watchdog.c:936:2: error: too many arguments to function >>> '__lockup_detector_reconfigure' >>>     __lockup_detector_reconfigure(false); >>>     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> kernel/watchdog.c:926:13: note: declared here >>>    static void __lockup_detector_reconfigure(void) >>>                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> kernel/watchdog.c: In function 'lockup_detector_setup': >>> kernel/watchdog.c:940:2: error: too many arguments to function >>> '__lockup_detector_reconfigure' >>>     __lockup_detector_reconfigure(false); >>>     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> kernel/watchdog.c:926:13: note: declared here >>>    static void __lockup_detector_reconfigure(void) >>>                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> kernel/watchdog.c: In function 'proc_watchdog_update': >>> kernel/watchdog.c:962:2: error: too many arguments to function >>> '__lockup_detector_reconfigure' >>>     __lockup_detector_reconfigure(thresh_changed); >>>     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> kernel/watchdog.c:926:13: note: declared here >>>    static void __lockup_detector_reconfigure(void) >>>                ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> >>> If you happen to fix this, please add below tag. >>> >>> Reported-by: Venkat Rao Bagalkote >> Yeah, the CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR unset version of >> __lockup_detector_reconfigure() was not updated :-( > Hello Stephen, Will this be fixed, or from now on we will have to set the SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR always in the .config file. Trying to understand the way forward. Regards, Venkat. > > After seeting CONFIG_SOFTLOCKUP_DETECTOR kernel build is successful. > > > Regards, > > Venkat. > >> >> This is now commit >> >>    45c4eb661074 ("watchdog: fix watchdog may detect false positive of >> softlockup") >> >> in the mm-nonmm-unstable tree. >>