linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 722 bytes --]

Hi Jens,

Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_start_io_acct':
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:43: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_end_io_acct':
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:56: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer

I reported a similar error against the dbd tree, which was fixed, but now
the commit that caused that error has been reverted and thus we get
this :-(

I have reverted the drbd commits from the block tree for today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[Jens Axboe]

On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_start_io_acct':
> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:43: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_end_io_acct':
> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:56: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
> 
> I reported a similar error against the dbd tree, which was fixed, but now
> the commit that caused that error has been reverted and thus we get
> this :-(
> 
> I have reverted the drbd commits from the block tree for today.

That's probably my fault, not drbd. I moved it to a new branch since it
isn't going into 2.6.32, and perhaps dropped that fix along the way.
I'll look into it.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1539 bytes --]

Hi Jens,

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 08:31:38 +0200 Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > 
> > Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > 
> > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_start_io_acct':
> > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:43: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
> > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_end_io_acct':
> > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:56: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
> > 
> > I reported a similar error against the dbd tree, which was fixed, but now
> > the commit that caused that error has been reverted and thus we get
> > this :-(
> > 
> > I have reverted the drbd commits from the block tree for today.
> 
> That's probably my fault, not drbd. I moved it to a new branch since it
> isn't going into 2.6.32, and perhaps dropped that fix along the way.
> I'll look into it.

The original problem was caused by commit
a9327cac440be4d8333bba975cbbf76045096275 ("Seperate read and write
statistics of in_flight requests") which went into Linus' tree on Sept
15.  The drbd tee was fixed to cope with that change.  Then that commit
was reverted in Linus' tree on Oct 5, so the fix to the drbd tree needs
to be reverted as well.  Unfortunately, the drbd tree has been rebased
into (basically) one commit, so that commit needs fixing.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[Jens Axboe]

On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 08:31:38 +0200 Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this:
> > > 
> > > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_start_io_acct':
> > > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:43: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
> > > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_end_io_acct':
> > > drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:56: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
> > > 
> > > I reported a similar error against the dbd tree, which was fixed, but now
> > > the commit that caused that error has been reverted and thus we get
> > > this :-(
> > > 
> > > I have reverted the drbd commits from the block tree for today.
> > 
> > That's probably my fault, not drbd. I moved it to a new branch since it
> > isn't going into 2.6.32, and perhaps dropped that fix along the way.
> > I'll look into it.
> 
> The original problem was caused by commit
> a9327cac440be4d8333bba975cbbf76045096275 ("Seperate read and write
> statistics of in_flight requests") which went into Linus' tree on Sept
> 15.  The drbd tee was fixed to cope with that change.  Then that commit
> was reverted in Linus' tree on Oct 5, so the fix to the drbd tree needs
> to be reverted as well.  Unfortunately, the drbd tree has been rebased
> into (basically) one commit, so that commit needs fixing.

Ah indeed, thanks. I'll put a fixup patch in place.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 267 bytes --]

Hi Jens,

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 09:29:29 +0200 Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> Ah indeed, thanks. I'll put a fixup patch in place.

Thanks.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[Jens Axboe]

On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 09:29:29 +0200 Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Ah indeed, thanks. I'll put a fixup patch in place.
> 
> Thanks.

Already done, should work now.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[david]

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_start_io_acct':
>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:43: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_end_io_acct':
>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:56: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
>>
>> I reported a similar error against the dbd tree, which was fixed, but now
>> the commit that caused that error has been reverted and thus we get
>> this :-(
>>
>> I have reverted the drbd commits from the block tree for today.
>
> That's probably my fault, not drbd. I moved it to a new branch since it
> isn't going into 2.6.32, and perhaps dropped that fix along the way.
> I'll look into it.


what needs to happen to get drbd accepted at this point? It sounded like 
they had the tree in good shape to be merged, except for the desire that 
was expressed to have them re-work all existing raid implementations 
before adding their code (and it sounded like that was not going to be 
allowed to hold it up)

David Lang

Re: linux-next: block/drbd tree build failure

[Jens Axboe]

On Mon, Oct 05 2009, david@lang.hm wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 05 2009, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi Jens,
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>>
>>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_start_io_acct':
>>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:43: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
>>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c: In function '_drbd_end_io_acct':
>>> drivers/block/drbd/drbd_req.c:56: error: subscripted value is neither array nor pointer
>>>
>>> I reported a similar error against the dbd tree, which was fixed, but now
>>> the commit that caused that error has been reverted and thus we get
>>> this :-(
>>>
>>> I have reverted the drbd commits from the block tree for today.
>>
>> That's probably my fault, not drbd. I moved it to a new branch since it
>> isn't going into 2.6.32, and perhaps dropped that fix along the way.
>> I'll look into it.
>
>
> what needs to happen to get drbd accepted at this point? It sounded like  
> they had the tree in good shape to be merged, except for the desire that  
> was expressed to have them re-work all existing raid implementations  
> before adding their code (and it sounded like that was not going to be  
> allowed to hold it up)

Linus said he was happy to merge it, but that .32 had slipped now
unfortunately. Usually it's not a problem to merge drivers later than
-rc1, but the discussion surrounding drdb makes it less of a no brainer.

So I expect to merge drbd for .33.

-- 
Jens Axboe