From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751498AbdJRUnH (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Oct 2017 16:43:07 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:46460 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751141AbdJRUnF (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Oct 2017 16:43:05 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 13:42:59 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: kbuild test robot , kbuild-all@01.org, Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , Mathieu Desnoyers , Lai Jiangshan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: do not include rtmutex_common.h unconditionally Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <201710180754.irSSdw3W%fengguang.wu@intel.com> <20171018041447.GF3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171018073209.7l4p3lloqiw4bm6y@linutronix.de> <20171018083436.mlbwx2zvakp54gbw@linutronix.de> <20171018153946.GH3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171018161621.3o7fljv4wl3geutv@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171018161621.3o7fljv4wl3geutv@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 17101820-2213-0000-0000-0000022DAF86 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00007915; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000237; SDB=6.00933057; UDB=6.00469929; IPR=6.00713347; BA=6.00005648; NDR=6.00000001; ZLA=6.00000005; ZF=6.00000009; ZB=6.00000000; ZP=6.00000000; ZH=6.00000000; ZU=6.00000002; MB=3.00017596; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2017-10-18 20:43:02 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17101820-2214-0000-0000-000057E5B389 Message-Id: <20171018204259.GR3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-10-18_08:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1707230000 definitions=main-1710180286 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 06:16:21PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2017-10-18 08:39:46 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Thank you very much, hand-applied as a preparatory patch for > > "Suppress lockdep false-positive ->boost_mtx complaints", please see > > below. > okay. > > > What I don't understand is why 0day test robot didn't complain about > > my copy of the exact same patch. Or maybe it did and I fat-fingered it? > > Except that I have gotten "BUILD SUCCESS" reports for commits including > > that one. > > I don't know. It is a "defconfig" for m32r. Unless it skipped that one, > dunno. No idea here, either. > > commit a06f537e75ea0a9e81245ede1b97bb3a5762b81b > > Author: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > > Date: Wed Oct 18 08:33:44 2017 -0700 > > > > rcu: do not include rtmutex_common.h unconditionally > > > > This commit adjusts include files and provides definitions in preparation > > for suppressing lockdep false-positive ->boost_mtx complaints. Without > > this preparation, architectures not supporting rt_mutex will get build > > failures. > > > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot > > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > > index fed95fa941e6..969eae45f05d 100644 > > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree_plugin.h > > @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ DEFINE_PER_CPU(char, rcu_cpu_has_work); > > * This probably needs to be excluded from -rt builds. > > */ > > #define rt_mutex_owner(a) ({ WARN_ON_ONCE(1); NULL; }) > > +#define rt_mutex_futex_unlock(x) WARN_ON_ONCE(1) > > > > #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_BOOST */ > > > > @@ -911,8 +912,6 @@ void exit_rcu(void) > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_BOOST > > > > -#include "../locking/rtmutex_common.h" > > - > > static void rcu_wake_cond(struct task_struct *t, int status) > > { > > /* > > So this probably works. This is > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git/commit/?h=rcu%2Fdev&id=a06f537e75ea0a9e81245ede1b97bb3a5762b81b&context=40&ignorews=0&dt=0 > > and the rtmutex_common is still in the ifdef which confused me at first. > But then you wrote "preparatory" and I saw the following patch > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git/commit/?h=rcu/next&id=33d7471ce21202ce954993552c2e0298d9e0f031 > > where you move that include rtmutex_common.h. You shouldn't do that > because "rt_mutex_futex_unlock()" has been added added here for the > !BOOST + TREE case. So I thing this should break your build if you > disable CONFIG_FUTEX (which in turn unselects CONFIg_RT_MUTEX). Builds for me on x86 and 0day test robot hasn't complained, but might as well get it right. The new commits are: a06f537e75ea ("rcu: do not include rtmutex_common.h unconditionally") 4a0fb5d70bb2 ("rcu: Suppress lockdep false-positive ->boost_mtx complaints") Thanx, Paul