On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Cc'ing Artem,
>> >
>> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>> >> ...
>> >> MODPOST 2742 modules
>> >> ...
>> >> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>> >> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>> >> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>> >> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>> >> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>> >> make[2]: Leaving directory
>> >> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>> >>
>> >> - Sedat -
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>> > http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
>> >
>>
>> Speculative patch (untested).
>>
>> - Sedat -
>>
>> $ diff -uprN fs/ubifs/xattr.c.orig fs/ubifs/xattr.c
>> --- fs/ubifs/xattr.c.orig 2011-04-01 15:56:08.471082117 +0200
>> +++ fs/ubifs/xattr.c 2011-04-01 18:08:27.355276827 +0200
>> @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ enum {
>>
>> static const struct inode_operations none_inode_operations;
>> static const struct file_operations none_file_operations;
>> +static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
>>
>> /**
>> * create_xattr - create an extended attribute.
>
> ubifs doess not have 'empty_aops' symbol and does not use such symbol. I
> do not understand how you got that build issue, but this must be
> something to do with your local setup.
>
> Also:
>
> [dedekind@eru linux-next (master)]$ grep -r 'empty_aops' *
> fs/nilfs2/page.c: static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
> fs/nilfs2/page.c: mapping->a_ops = &empty_aops;
> fs/inode.c: static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
> fs/inode.c: mapping->a_ops = &empty_aops;
>
> in the current linux-next.
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
>
>
You are right, I pulled linux-2.6-block.git#for-linus into linux-next.
Looks like linux-2.6-block-for-linus/0007-fs-export-empty_aops.patch
is causing this [1].
- Sedat -
[1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git;a=commit;h=2c9214b7b72cf440024d8b91523eea25bbc76040
cc'ing Jens ...
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > Cc'ing Artem,
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
> >> >> ...
> >> >> MODPOST 2742 modules
> >> >> ...
> >> >> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
> >> >> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
> >> >> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
> >> >> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
> >> >> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
> >> >> make[2]: Leaving directory
> >> >> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
> >> >>
> >> >> - Sedat -
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Cheers,
> >> > Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
> >> > http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
> >> >
> >>
> >> Speculative patch (untested).
> >>
> >> - Sedat -
> >>
> >> $ diff -uprN fs/ubifs/xattr.c.orig fs/ubifs/xattr.c
> >> --- fs/ubifs/xattr.c.orig 2011-04-01 15:56:08.471082117 +0200
> >> +++ fs/ubifs/xattr.c 2011-04-01 18:08:27.355276827 +0200
> >> @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ enum {
> >>
> >> static const struct inode_operations none_inode_operations;
> >> static const struct file_operations none_file_operations;
> >> +static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
> >>
> >> /**
> >> * create_xattr - create an extended attribute.
> >
> > ubifs doess not have 'empty_aops' symbol and does not use such symbol. I
> > do not understand how you got that build issue, but this must be
> > something to do with your local setup.
> >
> > Also:
> >
> > [dedekind@eru linux-next (master)]$ grep -r 'empty_aops' *
> > fs/nilfs2/page.c: static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
> > fs/nilfs2/page.c: mapping->a_ops = &empty_aops;
> > fs/inode.c: static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
> > fs/inode.c: mapping->a_ops = &empty_aops;
> >
> > in the current linux-next.
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
> >
> >
>
> You are right, I pulled linux-2.6-block.git#for-linus into linux-next.
> Looks like linux-2.6-block-for-linus/0007-fs-export-empty_aops.patch
> is causing this [1].
>
> - Sedat -
>
> [1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git;a=commit;h=2c9214b7b72cf440024d8b91523eea25bbc76040
>
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> cc'ing Jens ...
>
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > Cc'ing Artem,
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> MODPOST 2742 modules
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>> >> >> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>> >> >> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>> >> >> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>> >> >> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>> >> >> make[2]: Leaving directory
>> >> >> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>> >> >>
>> >> >> - Sedat -
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Cheers,
>> >> > Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>> >> > http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Speculative patch (untested).
>> >>
>> >> - Sedat -
>> >>
>> >> $ diff -uprN fs/ubifs/xattr.c.orig fs/ubifs/xattr.c
>> >> --- fs/ubifs/xattr.c.orig 2011-04-01 15:56:08.471082117 +0200
>> >> +++ fs/ubifs/xattr.c 2011-04-01 18:08:27.355276827 +0200
>> >> @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ enum {
>> >>
>> >> static const struct inode_operations none_inode_operations;
>> >> static const struct file_operations none_file_operations;
>> >> +static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
>> >>
>> >> /**
>> >> * create_xattr - create an extended attribute.
>> >
>> > ubifs doess not have 'empty_aops' symbol and does not use such symbol. I
>> > do not understand how you got that build issue, but this must be
>> > something to do with your local setup.
>> >
>> > Also:
>> >
>> > [dedekind@eru linux-next (master)]$ grep -r 'empty_aops' *
>> > fs/nilfs2/page.c: static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
>> > fs/nilfs2/page.c: mapping->a_ops = &empty_aops;
>> > fs/inode.c: static const struct address_space_operations empty_aops;
>> > fs/inode.c: mapping->a_ops = &empty_aops;
>> >
>> > in the current linux-next.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
>> >
>> >
>>
>> You are right, I pulled linux-2.6-block.git#for-linus into linux-next.
>> Looks like linux-2.6-block-for-linus/0007-fs-export-empty_aops.patch
>> is causing this [1].
>>
>> - Sedat -
>>
>> [1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/axboe/linux-2.6-block.git;a=commit;h=2c9214b7b72cf440024d8b91523eea25bbc76040
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
> http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
>
Just FYI:
I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
I am trying with the attached one.
- Sedat -
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>
>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >> > Cc'ing Artem,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>> >> >> ...
>>> >> >> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>> >> >> ...
>>> >> >> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>> >> >> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>> >> >> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>> >> >> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>> >> >> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>> >> >> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>> >> >> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>> >> >>
[...]
> Just FYI:
> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
> I am trying with the attached one.
>
> - Sedat -
>
I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
files.
- Sedat -
On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>
>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>
> [...]
>> Just FYI:
>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>
>> - Sedat -
>>
>
> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
> files.
What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
--
Jens Axboe
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>
>> [...]
>>> Just FYI:
>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>
>>> - Sedat -
>>>
>>
>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>> files.
>
> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>
I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
for-linus GIT branch.
- Sedat -
On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> [...]
>>>> Just FYI:
>>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>>
>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>>> files.
>>
>> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>>
>
> I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
> for-linus GIT branch.
Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined
in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance.
Are you using an old for-linus?
--
Jens Axboe
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>> Just FYI:
>>>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>>>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>>>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>>>> files.
>>>
>>> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>>>
>>
>> I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
>> for-linus GIT branch.
>
> Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined
> in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance.
>
> Are you using an old for-linus?
>
I dropped the idea of exporting empty_aops via include/linux/fs.h (&
changes in fs/inode.c) as it did not work as intended.
As an alternative I used empty_{aops,iops,fops} only in
fs/nilfs2/page.c and fs/ubifs/xattr.c where it is only needed (for
example for aops: static const struct address_space_operations
empty_aops {}; etc.)
- Sedat -
On 2011-04-04 00:33, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>> Just FYI:
>>>>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>>>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>>>>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>>>>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>>>>> files.
>>>>
>>>> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
>>> for-linus GIT branch.
>>
>> Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined
>> in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance.
>>
>> Are you using an old for-linus?
>>
>
> I dropped the idea of exporting empty_aops via include/linux/fs.h (&
> changes in fs/inode.c) as it did not work as intended.
> As an alternative I used empty_{aops,iops,fops} only in
> fs/nilfs2/page.c and fs/ubifs/xattr.c where it is only needed (for
> example for aops: static const struct address_space_operations
> empty_aops {}; etc.)
I'm asking one thing, you are replying with something else. The patches
you sent do NOT apply to for-linus.
--
Jens Axboe
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-04-04 00:33, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Just FYI:
>>>>>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>>>>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>>>>>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>>>>>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>>>>>> files.
>>>>>
>>>>> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
>>>> for-linus GIT branch.
>>>
>>> Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined
>>> in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance.
>>>
>>> Are you using an old for-linus?
>>>
>>
>> I dropped the idea of exporting empty_aops via include/linux/fs.h (&
>> changes in fs/inode.c) as it did not work as intended.
>> As an alternative I used empty_{aops,iops,fops} only in
>> fs/nilfs2/page.c and fs/ubifs/xattr.c where it is only needed (for
>> example for aops: static const struct address_space_operations
>> empty_aops {}; etc.)
>
> I'm asking one thing, you are replying with something else. The patches
> you sent do NOT apply to for-linus.
>
Oh, I am sorry. I checkout your tree and adapt.
- Sedat -
On 2011-04-04 00:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2011-04-04 00:33, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>> Just FYI:
>>>>>>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>>>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>>>>>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>>>>>>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>>>>>>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>>>>>>> files.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
>>>>> for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>
>>>> Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined
>>>> in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance.
>>>>
>>>> Are you using an old for-linus?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I dropped the idea of exporting empty_aops via include/linux/fs.h (&
>>> changes in fs/inode.c) as it did not work as intended.
>>> As an alternative I used empty_{aops,iops,fops} only in
>>> fs/nilfs2/page.c and fs/ubifs/xattr.c where it is only needed (for
>>> example for aops: static const struct address_space_operations
>>> empty_aops {}; etc.)
>>
>> I'm asking one thing, you are replying with something else. The patches
>> you sent do NOT apply to for-linus.
>>
>
> Oh, I am sorry. I checkout your tree and adapt.
I believe that you need is this, plain and simple.
diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
index b818730..33c963d 100644
--- a/fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/inode.c
@@ -130,6 +130,7 @@ static DECLARE_RWSEM(iprune_sem);
*/
const struct address_space_operations empty_aops = {
};
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(empty_aops);
/*
* Statistics gathering..
--
Jens Axboe
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-04-04 00:33, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Just FYI:
>>>>>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>>>>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>>>>>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>>>>>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>>>>>> files.
>>>>>
>>>>> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
>>>> for-linus GIT branch.
>>>
>>> Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined
>>> in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance.
>>>
>>> Are you using an old for-linus?
>>>
>>
>> I dropped the idea of exporting empty_aops via include/linux/fs.h (&
>> changes in fs/inode.c) as it did not work as intended.
>> As an alternative I used empty_{aops,iops,fops} only in
>> fs/nilfs2/page.c and fs/ubifs/xattr.c where it is only needed (for
>> example for aops: static const struct address_space_operations
>> empty_aops {}; etc.)
>
> I'm asking one thing, you are replying with something else. The patches
> you sent do NOT apply to for-linus.
>
Oh, I forgot the revert patch.
Here all 3 patches.
- Sedat -
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2011-04-04 00:38, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 2011-04-04 00:33, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> On 2011-04-04 00:19, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Jens Axboe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2011-04-02 13:02, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 2:20 AM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> cc'ing Jens ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 20:22:41 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Artem Bityutskiy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 18:10 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc'ing Artem,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:52 +0200 Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y set, I see in my build.log:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODPOST 2742 modules
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ERROR: "empty_aops" [fs/ubifs/ubifs.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[5]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[4]: *** [modules] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[3]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make[2]: Leaving directory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> `/home/sd/src/linux-2.6/linux-2.6.39-rc1/debian/build/build_i386_none_686-iniza'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> Just FYI:
>>>>>>>>> I contacted Jens last night and he refreshed his for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>>>>>> Adding missing include <linux/fs.h> did not fix the issue.
>>>>>>>>> I am trying with the attached one.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Sedat -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have split the single patch into two, first reflects ther build-error.
>>>>>>>> The second considers {inode,file}_operations have also undefined
>>>>>>>> functions by using "unified" empty_{iops,fops} as used in other fs/*
>>>>>>>> files.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What are these patches against? Not for-next nor my for-linus.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I tested with linux-next (next-20110401) as base and pulled-in your
>>>>>> for-linus GIT branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then perhaps there was some merge error. There's no empty_aops defined
>>>>> in my tree in nilfs_mapping_init(), for instance.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you using an old for-linus?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I dropped the idea of exporting empty_aops via include/linux/fs.h (&
>>>> changes in fs/inode.c) as it did not work as intended.
>>>> As an alternative I used empty_{aops,iops,fops} only in
>>>> fs/nilfs2/page.c and fs/ubifs/xattr.c where it is only needed (for
>>>> example for aops: static const struct address_space_operations
>>>> empty_aops {}; etc.)
>>>
>>> I'm asking one thing, you are replying with something else. The patches
>>> you sent do NOT apply to for-linus.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, I am sorry. I checkout your tree and adapt.
>
> I believe that you need is this, plain and simple.
>
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index b818730..33c963d 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -130,6 +130,7 @@ static DECLARE_RWSEM(iprune_sem);
> */
> const struct address_space_operations empty_aops = {
> };
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(empty_aops);
>
> /*
> * Statistics gathering..
>
As you like....
To have a unified variable nomenclature/usage I would like to see in
fs/ubifs/xattr.c:
s/none_inode_operations/empty_iops
s/none_file_operations/empty_fops
- Sedat -