2020-05-11 04:33:01

by Stephen Rothwell

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

Hi all,

After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c: In function 'aoeblk_gdalloc':
drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c:410:21: error: 'struct backing_dev_info' has no member named 'name'
410 | q->backing_dev_info->name = "aoe";
| ^~

Caused by commit

1cd925d58385 ("bdi: remove the name field in struct backing_dev_info")

I applied the following patch for today.

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 14:19:30 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] bdi: fix up for "remove the name field in struct
backing_dev_info"

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
---
drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c b/drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c
index a27804d71e12..5ca7216e9e01 100644
--- a/drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c
+++ b/drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c
@@ -407,7 +407,6 @@ aoeblk_gdalloc(void *vp)
WARN_ON(d->gd);
WARN_ON(d->flags & DEVFL_UP);
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS);
- q->backing_dev_info->name = "aoe";
q->backing_dev_info->ra_pages = READ_AHEAD / PAGE_SIZE;
d->bufpool = mp;
d->blkq = gd->queue = q;
--
2.26.2

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell


Attachments:
(No filename) (499.00 B)
OpenPGP digital signature

2020-05-11 15:09:45

by Jens Axboe

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

On 5/10/20 10:27 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c: In function 'aoeblk_gdalloc':
> drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c:410:21: error: 'struct backing_dev_info' has no member named 'name'
> 410 | q->backing_dev_info->name = "aoe";
> | ^~
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 1cd925d58385 ("bdi: remove the name field in struct backing_dev_info")

Gah, thanks Stephen. This series is looking less and less impressive,
fallout for both 5.7 and 5.8, in terms of build testing (none).

--
Jens Axboe

2020-05-11 15:22:01

by Christoph Hellwig

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:06:41AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 5/10/20 10:27 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c: In function 'aoeblk_gdalloc':
> > drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c:410:21: error: 'struct backing_dev_info' has no member named 'name'
> > 410 | q->backing_dev_info->name = "aoe";
> > | ^~
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 1cd925d58385 ("bdi: remove the name field in struct backing_dev_info")
>
> Gah, thanks Stephen. This series is looking less and less impressive,
> fallout for both 5.7 and 5.8, in terms of build testing (none).

And the sad part is that it has been sitting out there exposed to the
buildbot for weeks. Sigh.

2020-05-11 15:32:27

by Jens Axboe

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

On 5/11/20 9:17 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:06:41AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 5/10/20 10:27 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>>
>>> drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c: In function 'aoeblk_gdalloc':
>>> drivers/block/aoe/aoeblk.c:410:21: error: 'struct backing_dev_info' has no member named 'name'
>>> 410 | q->backing_dev_info->name = "aoe";
>>> | ^~
>>>
>>> Caused by commit
>>>
>>> 1cd925d58385 ("bdi: remove the name field in struct backing_dev_info")
>>
>> Gah, thanks Stephen. This series is looking less and less impressive,
>> fallout for both 5.7 and 5.8, in terms of build testing (none).
>
> And the sad part is that it has been sitting out there exposed to the
> buildbot for weeks. Sigh.

Indeed, I do wish the build bot was a bit more expedient (as in 24h turn
around would be good), and reliable. Seems hit or miss, don't fully trust
it and this series is an example of why.

--
Jens Axboe