Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] nfsd: Mark variable __maybe_unused to avoid W=1 build break

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 12:08:09PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> On 11/27/25 11:55 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 11:20:16AM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> >> On 11/27/25 2:50 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 08:49:29AM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 13 Nov 2025 09:31:31 +0100, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>>> Clang is not happy about set but (in some cases) unused variable:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> fs/nfsd/export.c:1027:17: error: variable 'inode' set but not used [-Werror,-Wunused-but-set-variable]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> since it's used as a parameter to dprintk() which might be configured
> >>>>> a no-op. To avoid uglifying code with the specific ifdeffery just mark
> >>>>> the variable __maybe_unused.

[...]

> >>>> Applied to nfsd-testing, thanks!
> >>>>
> >>>> [1/1] nfsd: Mark variable __maybe_unused to avoid W=1 build break
> >>>>       commit: 56e9f88b25abf08de6f2b1bfbbb2ddc4e6622d1e
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, but still no appearance in Linux Next and problem seems to be present.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The usual practice is to keep patches in nfsd-testing for four
> >> weeks to allow NFSD and community CI processes to work, and to
> >> enable extended review before it is merged. Both the community
> >> CI processes (eg, zero-day bots) and the availability of
> >> reviewers are not something I have control over.
> >>
> >> It will be available for upstream merge after December 11. You
> >> seem to be suggesting there is a sense of urgency so I will
> >> direct it towards v6.20-rc as soon as it is merge-ready.
> 
> Oops:
> 
> s/v6.20-rc/v6.19-rc/
> 
> 
> > Since it's (not so critical TBH, but still) a build breakage I supposed this to
> > go via the respective -fixes path.
> 
> Yes, what I meant above was I will submit it just after the
> v6.19 merge window closes in a few weeks.

Ah, that's wonderful, thanks!

> > But okay, your call.
> 
> It's just a build warning, but I know such issues affect the
> Fedora and Red Hat kernel build pipelines, as they enable the
> "warning => error" compile option.
> 
> However, those distributions enable SunRPC debugging, which
> means they won't see it. So I think this problem is not likely
> to be pervasive.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko