From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.18]) (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 8586454648; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 19:52:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724701952; cv=none; b=WOi+H6zXYHW7REj19KmPTOQ38wUUDzzszXWijRGNs6Isn4gSPi+0pDghmzaY5pAWy6bf4cVhB9o3qiiIwXDgkWnHWqif04igcHZlhI3D9cipz/CBbGlCTnLvtEQPW5zr2K6+wOq/qWImYqXGhrpRfIKXo5oDCt8DQglFW1kF/88= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724701952; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lDV6G6IK1uYgrXaIRBZ2JSuYByw2/GsqdtN+OxIArF4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=C/HCZ51IPzTtZ+qTYrpRsDshPzhAHf1qrlLlerskQ2HytD7bb9G6kmxotldfLo5CUA1jJANfQuE+Prg+NhJq2H7csr2nK0NqbleAhf3ED91QhU1YFeH9F+FaYvu7srIKAllOiQb9uuiSagAsW1s6QkdohQjnxiriJ+6J3bsWxfY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=e77UMpO0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="e77UMpO0" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1724701951; x=1756237951; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=lDV6G6IK1uYgrXaIRBZ2JSuYByw2/GsqdtN+OxIArF4=; b=e77UMpO0AahJgZvV78AVbPKE55U44HdZ9ScKAXc9pR5n8tRTuRziwvyh uS1mSm4xBJ3UROL+T+6ghlK0TDWjjMyEqRBf2sOqxEb1e1d0rqE4b93GO z2dpWUcs41aLqTsE/V395Cal0Lk4tagP9AuNuSyrW6NKKow+AruY2kvIe xl9X0igVuU+ywXLNh+6BcGDHLlqs3XSMPERX6kU6niPx8Bwj9ob0AL1Xp H7YltEjTU3LFd5HCT6oLSvj9okuTVvk3UgkmJT8eofHtj2n5mqO0CQXxy 5Wi6LukNFDr9pfWXzMT3PTbS3JrTcy3lhFc/wWmLhv2cDu14LQjZqJq3W w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: UNTCXOakRY+P7jYIl7MCZg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +MRwIC6oSiqTOnlCw2tgJA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11176"; a="22669375" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,178,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="22669375" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by fmvoesa112.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Aug 2024 12:52:30 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: e+DpcGouTzCr8iWRirBe+A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: bgxsFWqcTj6B1mjzJ2UiAA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,178,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="66952618" Received: from lkp-server01.sh.intel.com (HELO 9a732dc145d3) ([10.239.97.150]) by fmviesa005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 Aug 2024 12:52:25 -0700 Received: from kbuild by 9a732dc145d3 with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1siflH-000HY2-1y; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 19:52:23 +0000 Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 03:52:12 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, Linux Memory Management List , Christoph Hellwig , Yafang Shao , Kent Overstreet , jack@suse.cz, Christian Brauner , Alexander Viro , Paul Moore , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bcachefs: do not use PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM Message-ID: <202408270304.AUPHM0xo-lkp@intel.com> References: <20240826085347.1152675-2-mhocko@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240826085347.1152675-2-mhocko@kernel.org> Hi Michal, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on akpm-mm/mm-everything] [also build test ERROR on tip/sched/core brauner-vfs/vfs.all linus/master v6.11-rc5] [cannot apply to next-20240826] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Michal-Hocko/bcachefs-do-not-use-PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM/20240826-171013 base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm.git mm-everything patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240826085347.1152675-2-mhocko%40kernel.org patch subject: [PATCH 1/2] bcachefs: do not use PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM config: arc-randconfig-001-20240827 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240827/202408270304.AUPHM0xo-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: arc-elf-gcc (GCC) 13.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240827/202408270304.AUPHM0xo-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202408270304.AUPHM0xo-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): fs/bcachefs/fs.c: In function '__bch2_new_inode': >> fs/bcachefs/fs.c:248:70: error: macro "unlikely" passed 2 arguments, but takes just 1 248 | if (unlikely(inode_init_always_gfp(c->vfs_sb, &inode->v), gfp)) { | ^ In file included from include/linux/build_bug.h:5, from include/linux/container_of.h:5, from include/linux/list.h:5, from include/linux/backing-dev-defs.h:5, from fs/bcachefs/bcachefs.h:186, from fs/bcachefs/fs.c:4: include/linux/compiler.h:77: note: macro "unlikely" defined here 77 | # define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 0) | >> fs/bcachefs/fs.c:248:13: error: 'unlikely' undeclared (first use in this function) 248 | if (unlikely(inode_init_always_gfp(c->vfs_sb, &inode->v), gfp)) { | ^~~~~~~~ fs/bcachefs/fs.c:248:13: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in fs/bcachefs/fs.c: In function 'bch2_new_inode': >> fs/bcachefs/fs.c:261:67: error: 'GFP_NOWARN' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'GFP_NOWAIT'? 261 | struct bch_inode_info *inode = __bch2_new_inode(trans->c, GFP_NOWARN | GFP_NOWAIT); | ^~~~~~~~~~ | GFP_NOWAIT vim +/unlikely +248 fs/bcachefs/fs.c 233 234 static struct bch_inode_info *__bch2_new_inode(struct bch_fs *c, gfp_t gfp) 235 { 236 struct bch_inode_info *inode = kmem_cache_alloc(bch2_inode_cache, gfp); 237 if (!inode) 238 return NULL; 239 240 inode_init_once(&inode->v); 241 mutex_init(&inode->ei_update_lock); 242 two_state_lock_init(&inode->ei_pagecache_lock); 243 INIT_LIST_HEAD(&inode->ei_vfs_inode_list); 244 inode->ei_flags = 0; 245 mutex_init(&inode->ei_quota_lock); 246 memset(&inode->ei_devs_need_flush, 0, sizeof(inode->ei_devs_need_flush)); 247 > 248 if (unlikely(inode_init_always_gfp(c->vfs_sb, &inode->v), gfp)) { 249 kmem_cache_free(bch2_inode_cache, inode); 250 return NULL; 251 } 252 253 return inode; 254 } 255 256 /* 257 * Allocate a new inode, dropping/retaking btree locks if necessary: 258 */ 259 static struct bch_inode_info *bch2_new_inode(struct btree_trans *trans) 260 { > 261 struct bch_inode_info *inode = __bch2_new_inode(trans->c, GFP_NOWARN | GFP_NOWAIT); 262 263 if (unlikely(!inode)) { 264 int ret = drop_locks_do(trans, (inode = __bch2_new_inode(trans->c, GFP_NOFS)) ? 0 : -ENOMEM); 265 if (ret && inode) { 266 __destroy_inode(&inode->v); 267 kmem_cache_free(bch2_inode_cache, inode); 268 } 269 if (ret) 270 return ERR_PTR(ret); 271 } 272 273 return inode; 274 } 275 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki