Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Message-ID: <b12eb111-ea5f-e396-d7b3-249bf1e45e9d@kernel.dk>
Date:   Mon, 23 May 2022 06:31:27 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
References: <20220523124921.7d6bbf34@canb.auug.org.au>
 <df3ffbac-2f4e-df03-8b29-8e2e4bb69fac@kernel.dk>
 <f1a9c46e-59a6-7b68-fd17-6f2563e24e98@suse.de>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
In-Reply-To: <f1a9c46e-59a6-7b68-fd17-6f2563e24e98@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/23/22 12:05 AM, Coly Li wrote:
> On 5/23/22 10:52 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 5/22/22 8:49 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
>>> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>>>
>>> drivers/md/bcache/btree.c: In function 'bch_btree_check':
>>> drivers/md/bcache/btree.c:2073:1: error: the frame size of 2184 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
>>>   2073 | }
>>>        | ^
>>>
>>> Caused by commit
>>>
>>>    c766acd3d78e ("bcache: improve multithreaded bch_btree_check()")
>>>
>>> struct btree_check_state is very large to put on the stack :-(
>>>
>>> I have reverted that commit for today.
> 
> Hi Jens,
> 
>> Thanks, I'll drop it. It's not part of the initial request sent to
>> Linus, exactly because it arrived late.
>>
>> Coly, I'm dropping this series.
> 
> Yes please. Should I re-submit the fixed series to you in later -RC
> round, or wait for 5.20 merge window?

Just resubmit it when it's been fixed, then we'll figure it out at that
point. As mentioned in the original email, at the very least it needs a
linux-next soak for a weeks time. If the patches are simple enough and
don't cause odd build errors/warnings, then we can still make this
release if need be.

-- 
Jens Axboe