Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:22:03 -0700
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Ross Zwisler <zwisler@gmail.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
        linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 07/61] xarray: Add the xa_lock to the radix_tree_root
Message-ID: <20180412212203.GD18364@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <20180313132639.17387-1-willy@infradead.org>
 <20180313132639.17387-8-willy@infradead.org>
 <CAOxpaSXDX1fyrOnnsehEoRgQz2_K1OmOn9TikZzJcXmwMLEfnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180412211036.GB18364@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <CAOxpaSV5L_O9zO_+JLXk9e3SMjm0Gc90ZxSEHaJmvN5YsYpjMA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAOxpaSV5L_O9zO_+JLXk9e3SMjm0Gc90ZxSEHaJmvN5YsYpjMA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 03:16:23PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:10 PM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 02:59:32PM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> >> This is causing build breakage in the radix tree test suite in the
> >> current linux/master:
> >>
> >> ./linux/../../../../include/linux/idr.h: In function ‘idr_init_base’:
> >> ./linux/../../../../include/linux/radix-tree.h:129:2: warning:
> >> implicit declaration of function ‘spin_lock_init’; did you mean
> >> ‘spinlock_t’? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
> >
> > Argh.  That was added two patches later in
> > "xarray: Add definition of struct xarray":
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/include/linux/spinlock.h b/tools/include/linux/spinlock.h
> > index b21b586b9854..4ec4d2cbe27a 100644
> > --- a/tools/include/linux/spinlock.h
> > +++ b/tools/include/linux/spinlock.h
> > @@ -6,8 +6,9 @@
> >  #include <stdbool.h>
> >
> >  #define spinlock_t             pthread_mutex_t
> > -#define DEFINE_SPINLOCK(x)     pthread_mutex_t x = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
> > +#define DEFINE_SPINLOCK(x)     pthread_mutex_t x = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER
> >  #define __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(x)        (pthread_mutex_t)PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER
> > +#define spin_lock_init(x)      pthread_mutex_init(x, NULL)
> >
> >  #define spin_lock_irqsave(x, f)                (void)f, pthread_mutex_lock(x)
> >  #define spin_unlock_irqrestore(x, f)   (void)f, pthread_mutex_unlock(x)
> >
> > I didn't pick up that it was needed this early on in the patch series.
> 
> Hmmm..I don't know if it's a patch ordering issue, because this
> happens with the current linux/master where presumably all the patches
> are present?

No, Andrew only merged the first 8 or so because of lack of review of
the remaining patches.  Even though I cc'd people as hard as I could.
Including you.  :-P

You could, for example, review the DAX patches ...