linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfs-anna tree

linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfs-anna tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 731 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:

/home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c: In function 'root_nfs_data':
/home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c:264:5: error: implicit declaration of function 'fmtcheck'; did you mean 'dst_check'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
     fmtcheck(tmp, "%s", 0), utsname()->nodename);
     ^~~~~~~~
     dst_check

Caused by commit

  66ab6f062d96 ("nfs: use fmtcheck() in root_nfs_data")

For some reason this did not turn up until I was building the
hwmon-staging tree (maybe some Kconfig change casued it to be built now),
so I have just reverted that commit for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfs-anna tree

[Rasmus Villemoes]

On 17/12/2018 00.16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c: In function 'root_nfs_data':
> /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c:264:5: error: implicit declaration of function 'fmtcheck'; did you mean 'dst_check'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>      fmtcheck(tmp, "%s", 0), utsname()->nodename);
>      ^~~~~~~~
>      dst_check
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   66ab6f062d96 ("nfs: use fmtcheck() in root_nfs_data")

I didn't know anybody had picked that one up. It's completely safe to
just ignore that commit until the fmtcheck() utility is actually in.

Anna, can I take the fact that this was picked up as a sort-of implicit
ack, that I can use if and when I ever get around to resending the
fmtcheck() series? And for simplicitly, would you mind if the nfs patch
would just be routed along with the patches introducing fmtcheck()?

Rasmus

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfs-anna tree

[Anna Schumaker]

On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 12:18 +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 17/12/2018 00.16, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c: In function 'root_nfs_data':
> > /home/sfr/next/next/fs/nfs/nfsroot.c:264:5: error: implicit declaration of
> > function 'fmtcheck'; did you mean 'dst_check'? [-Werror=implicit-function-
> > declaration]
> >      fmtcheck(tmp, "%s", 0), utsname()->nodename);
> >      ^~~~~~~~
> >      dst_check
> > 
> > Caused by commit
> > 
> >   66ab6f062d96 ("nfs: use fmtcheck() in root_nfs_data")
> 
> I didn't know anybody had picked that one up. It's completely safe to
> just ignore that commit until the fmtcheck() utility is actually in.
> 
> Anna, can I take the fact that this was picked up as a sort-of implicit
> ack, that I can use if and when I ever get around to resending the
> fmtcheck() series? And for simplicitly, would you mind if the nfs patch
> would just be routed along with the patches introducing fmtcheck()?

Sure that sounds good.  I'll remove it from my tree for now.

> 
> Rasmus
> 
> 

linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfs-anna tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5211 bytes --]

Hi all,

After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:

In file included from /tmp/next/build/arch/arm/include/asm/div64.h:114,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/math.h:6,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/kernel.h:27,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/uio.h:8,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/socket.h:8,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/uapi/linux/in.h:25,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/in.h:19,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/nfs_fs.h:22,
                 from /tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:10:
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c: In function 'calc_mirror_idx_from_commit':
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:183:35: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast [-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types]
  183 |         (void)(((typeof((n)) *)0) == ((uint64_t *)0));  \
      |                                   ^~
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:685:9: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  685 |         do_div(mirror_idx, flseg->mirror_array[0]->dss_count);
      |         ^~~~~~
In file included from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/array_size.h:5,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/kernel.h:16:
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:195:32: warning: right shift count >= width of type [-Wshift-count-overflow]
  195 |         } else if (likely(((n) >> 32) == 0)) {          \
      |                                ^~
/tmp/next/build/include/linux/compiler.h:76:45: note: in definition of macro 'likely'
   76 | # define likely(x)      __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
      |                                             ^
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:685:9: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  685 |         do_div(mirror_idx, flseg->mirror_array[0]->dss_count);
      |         ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:199:36: error: passing argument 1 of '__div64_32' from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
  199 |                 __rem = __div64_32(&(n), __base);       \
      |                                    ^~~~
      |                                    |
      |                                    u32 * {aka unsigned int *}
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:685:9: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  685 |         do_div(mirror_idx, flseg->mirror_array[0]->dss_count);
      |         ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/arch/arm/include/asm/div64.h:24:45: note: expected 'uint64_t *' {aka 'long long unsigned int *'} but argument is of type 'u32 *' {aka 'unsigned int *'}
   24 | static inline uint32_t __div64_32(uint64_t *n, uint32_t base)
      |                                   ~~~~~~~~~~^
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c: In function 'calc_dss_id_from_commit':
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:183:35: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast [-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types]
  183 |         (void)(((typeof((n)) *)0) == ((uint64_t *)0));  \
      |                                   ^~
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:696:16: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  696 |         return do_div(mirror_idx, flseg->mirror_array[0]->dss_count);
      |                ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:195:32: warning: right shift count >= width of type [-Wshift-count-overflow]
  195 |         } else if (likely(((n) >> 32) == 0)) {          \
      |                                ^~
/tmp/next/build/include/linux/compiler.h:76:45: note: in definition of macro 'likely'
   76 | # define likely(x)      __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
      |                                             ^
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:696:16: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  696 |         return do_div(mirror_idx, flseg->mirror_array[0]->dss_count);
      |                ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:199:36: error: passing argument 1 of '__div64_32' from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
  199 |                 __rem = __div64_32(&(n), __base);       \
      |                                    ^~~~
      |                                    |
      |                                    u32 * {aka unsigned int *}
/tmp/next/build/fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:696:16: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  696 |         return do_div(mirror_idx, flseg->mirror_array[0]->dss_count);
      |                ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/arch/arm/include/asm/div64.h:24:45: note: expected 'uint64_t *' {aka 'long long unsigned int *'} but argument is of type 'u32 *' {aka 'unsigned int *'}
   24 | static inline uint32_t __div64_32(uint64_t *n, uint32_t base)
      |                                   ~~~~~~~~~~^
make[6]: *** [/tmp/next/build/scripts/Makefile.build:287: fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.o] Error 1

Caused by commit

   67ee714244dfb ("NFSv4/flexfiles: Commit path updates for striped layouts")

I have used the tree from yesterday instead.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the nfs-anna tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 202 bytes --]

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 01:35:41PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> After merging the nfs-anna tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:

This issue is still present today.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]