The commit f05499a06fb4 ("writeback: use ino_t for inodes in
tracepoints") introduced a lot of GCC compilation warnings on s390,
In file included from ./include/trace/define_trace.h:102,
from ./include/trace/events/writeback.h:904,
from fs/fs-writeback.c:82:
./include/trace/events/writeback.h: In function
'trace_raw_output_writeback_page_template':
./include/trace/events/writeback.h:76:12: warning: format '%lu' expects
argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t'
{aka 'unsigned int'} [-Wformat=]
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu index=%lu",
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/trace/trace_events.h:360:22: note: in definition of macro
'DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS'
trace_seq_printf(s, print); \
^~~~~
./include/trace/events/writeback.h:76:2: note: in expansion of macro
'TP_printk'
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu index=%lu",
^~~~~~~~~
Fix them by adding necessary casts where ino_t could be either "unsigned
int" or "unsigned long".
Fixes: f05499a06fb4 ("writeback: use ino_t for inodes in tracepoints")
Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <[email protected]>
---
include/trace/events/writeback.h | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/trace/events/writeback.h b/include/trace/events/writeback.h
index b4f0ffe1817e..ef50be4e5e6c 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/writeback.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/writeback.h
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu index=%lu",
__entry->name,
- __entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
__entry->index
)
);
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu state=%s flags=%s",
__entry->name,
- __entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
show_inode_state(__entry->state),
show_inode_state(__entry->flags)
)
@@ -201,8 +201,8 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu cgroup_ino=%lu history=0x%x",
__entry->name,
- __entry->ino,
- __entry->cgroup_ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino,
__entry->history
)
);
@@ -230,9 +230,9 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu old_cgroup_ino=%lu new_cgroup_ino=%lu",
__entry->name,
- __entry->ino,
- __entry->old_cgroup_ino,
- __entry->new_cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->old_cgroup_ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->new_cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -266,10 +266,10 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("bdi %s[%llu]: ino=%lu memcg_id=%u cgroup_ino=%lu page_cgroup_ino=%lu",
__entry->name,
__entry->bdi_id,
- __entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
__entry->memcg_id,
- __entry->cgroup_ino,
- __entry->page_cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->page_cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -296,7 +296,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("bdi %s: cgroup_ino=%lu frn_bdi_id=%u frn_memcg_id=%u",
__entry->name,
- __entry->cgroup_ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino,
__entry->frn_bdi_id,
__entry->frn_memcg_id
)
@@ -326,9 +326,9 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu sync_mode=%d cgroup_ino=%lu",
__entry->name,
- __entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
__entry->sync_mode,
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
__entry->range_cyclic,
__entry->for_background,
__print_symbolic(__entry->reason, WB_WORK_REASON),
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
#define DEFINE_WRITEBACK_WORK_EVENT(name) \
@@ -421,7 +421,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
),
TP_printk("bdi %s: cgroup_ino=%lu",
__entry->name,
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
#define DEFINE_WRITEBACK_EVENT(name) \
@@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
__entry->range_cyclic,
__entry->range_start,
__entry->range_end,
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
)
@@ -528,7 +528,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
__entry->age, /* older_than_this in relative milliseconds */
__entry->moved,
__print_symbolic(__entry->reason, WB_WORK_REASON),
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -622,7 +622,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
__entry->dirty_ratelimit, /* base ratelimit */
__entry->task_ratelimit, /* ratelimit with position control */
__entry->balanced_dirty_ratelimit, /* the balanced ratelimit */
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -707,7 +707,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
__entry->pause, /* ms */
__entry->period, /* ms */
__entry->think, /* ms */
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -735,11 +735,11 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu state=%s dirtied_when=%lu age=%lu cgroup_ino=%lu",
__entry->name,
- __entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
show_inode_state(__entry->state),
__entry->dirtied_when,
(jiffies - __entry->dirtied_when) / HZ,
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -813,14 +813,14 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu state=%s dirtied_when=%lu age=%lu "
"index=%lu to_write=%ld wrote=%lu cgroup_ino=%lu",
__entry->name,
- __entry->ino,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino,
show_inode_state(__entry->state),
__entry->dirtied_when,
(jiffies - __entry->dirtied_when) / HZ,
__entry->writeback_index,
__entry->nr_to_write,
__entry->wrote,
- __entry->cgroup_ino
+ (unsigned long)__entry->cgroup_ino
)
);
@@ -861,7 +861,7 @@ static inline ino_t __trace_wbc_assign_cgroup(struct writeback_control *wbc)
TP_printk("dev %d,%d ino %lu dirtied %lu state %s mode 0%o",
MAJOR(__entry->dev), MINOR(__entry->dev),
- __entry->ino, __entry->dirtied_when,
+ (unsigned long)__entry->ino, __entry->dirtied_when,
show_inode_state(__entry->state), __entry->mode)
);
--
1.8.3.1
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:17:41PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> The commit f05499a06fb4 ("writeback: use ino_t for inodes in
> tracepoints") introduced a lot of GCC compilation warnings on s390,
>
> In file included from ./include/trace/define_trace.h:102,
> from ./include/trace/events/writeback.h:904,
> from fs/fs-writeback.c:82:
> ./include/trace/events/writeback.h: In function
> 'trace_raw_output_writeback_page_template':
> ./include/trace/events/writeback.h:76:12: warning: format '%lu' expects
> argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t'
> {aka 'unsigned int'} [-Wformat=]
> TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu index=%lu",
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ./include/trace/trace_events.h:360:22: note: in definition of macro
> 'DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS'
> trace_seq_printf(s, print); \
> ^~~~~
> ./include/trace/events/writeback.h:76:2: note: in expansion of macro
> 'TP_printk'
> TP_printk("bdi %s: ino=%lu index=%lu",
> ^~~~~~~~~
>
> Fix them by adding necessary casts where ino_t could be either "unsigned
> int" or "unsigned long".
>
> Fixes: f05499a06fb4 ("writeback: use ino_t for inodes in tracepoints")
> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Thanks.
--
tejun
> On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Tejun, suppose you will take this patch via your tree together with the series or should I Cc Andrew who normally handle this file?
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:26:21PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
>
>
> > On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
>
> Tejun, suppose you will take this patch via your tree together with the series or should I Cc Andrew who normally handle this file?
Patches in this area usually goes through Jens's block tree.
Thanks.
--
tejun
On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 06:55 -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:26:21PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> >
> > Tejun, suppose you will take this patch via your tree together with the series or should I Cc Andrew who normally handle this file?
>
> Patches in this area usually goes through Jens's block tree.
I remember that last time Jens had no interests in picking up trivial patches
like this one. See the commit d1a445d3b86c ("include/trace/events/writeback.h:
fix -Wstringop-truncation warnings").
Andrew, care to pick up this again?
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
On 11/20/19 12:56 PM, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 06:55 -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:26:21PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Tejun, suppose you will take this patch via your tree together with the series or should I Cc Andrew who normally handle this file?
>>
>> Patches in this area usually goes through Jens's block tree.
>
> I remember that last time Jens had no interests in picking up trivial patches
> like this one. See the commit d1a445d3b86c ("include/trace/events/writeback.h:
> fix -Wstringop-truncation warnings").
>
> Andrew, care to pick up this again?
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
I'm fine with picking it up, this one isn't trivial and it's fixing
warnings. But I didn't (and don't) carry f05499a06fb4 in my tree,
so it'd be more logical to funnel this one through the tree that
has the offending commit.
--
Jens Axboe
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 04:17:51PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/20/19 12:56 PM, Qian Cai wrote:
> > On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 06:55 -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:26:21PM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:21 PM, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> Tejun, suppose you will take this patch via your tree together with the series or should I Cc Andrew who normally handle this file?
> >>
> >> Patches in this area usually goes through Jens's block tree.
> >
> > I remember that last time Jens had no interests in picking up trivial patches
> > like this one. See the commit d1a445d3b86c ("include/trace/events/writeback.h:
> > fix -Wstringop-truncation warnings").
> >
> > Andrew, care to pick up this again?
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
>
> I'm fine with picking it up, this one isn't trivial and it's fixing
> warnings. But I didn't (and don't) carry f05499a06fb4 in my tree,
> so it'd be more logical to funnel this one through the tree that
> has the offending commit.
Yeah, I was being dumb. This was from the commit which got applied to
cgroup tree as part of the cgroup id unification. Applied to
cgroup/for-5.5.
Thanks.
--
tejun