Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752505AbdGDPQF (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2017 11:16:05 -0400 Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net ([208.91.199.152]:40606 "EHLO bh-25.webhostbox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752342AbdGDPQC (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jul 2017 11:16:02 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 08:15:57 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Jens Axboe , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig , Sebastian Ott Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree Message-ID: <20170704151557.GA22088@roeck-us.net> References: <20170613205409.4b7e06f9@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170613205409.4b7e06f9@canb.auug.org.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Authenticated_sender: guenter@roeck-us.net X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - bh-25.webhostbox.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - roeck-us.net X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: bh-25.webhostbox.net: authenticated_id: guenter@roeck-us.net X-Authenticated-Sender: bh-25.webhostbox.net: guenter@roeck-us.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2412 Lines: 77 On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 08:54:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Jall, > > After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (s390x > s390-defconfig) failed like this: > > drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c:293:10: error: 'BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY' undeclared (first use in this function) > drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c:327:9: error: 'BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_OK' undeclared (first use in this function) > > Caused by commit > > fc17b6534eb8 ("blk-mq: switch ->queue_rq return value to blk_status_t") > > interacting with commit > > 12d907626539 ("s390/scm: convert to blk-mq") > > from the s390 tree. > > Is the following the correct merge fixup? > The failure made int into Linus' tree, but the fix didn't. Is the fix pending in some other queue or does it have to be (re-)submitted ? Guenter > From: Stephen Rothwell > Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:51:32 +1000 > Subject: [PATCH] s390: fix up for "blk-mq: switch ->queue_rq return value to > blk_status_t" > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell > --- > drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c > index 42018a20f2b7..2cd6123c8f18 100644 > --- a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c > +++ b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c > @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, > spin_lock(&sq->lock); > if (!scm_permit_request(bdev, req)) { > spin_unlock(&sq->lock); > - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY; > + return BLK_STS_RESOURCE; > } > > scmrq = sq->scmrq; > @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, > if (!scmrq) { > SCM_LOG(5, "no request"); > spin_unlock(&sq->lock); > - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY; > + return BLK_STS_RESOURCE; > } > scm_request_init(bdev, scmrq); > sq->scmrq = scmrq; > @@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, > > sq->scmrq = NULL; > spin_unlock(&sq->lock); > - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY; > + return BLK_STS_RESOURCE; > } > blk_mq_start_request(req); > > @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, > sq->scmrq = NULL; > } > spin_unlock(&sq->lock); > - return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_OK; > + return BLK_STS_OK; > } > > static int scm_blk_init_hctx(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, void *data,