Hi Bryan,
Kernel build failed on
tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert v3 into a module
config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
All related error/warning messages:
fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode' was here
vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
1589 return status;
1590 }
1591
> 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
1593 {
1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
---
0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> Intel Corporation
On 07/31/2012 09:58 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:44 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>> On 07/31/2012 09:33 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:30 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>>> On 07/31/2012 09:05 AM, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>>>> On 07/31/2012 08:55 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:47 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07/30/2012 11:14 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>>>>>> Bryan,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IS_ENABLED() will check for CONFIG_NFS_V*_MODULE, last I checked the defined() macro doesn't. Putting this into a separate patch makes the change non-bisectable since gcc will be checking against CONFIG_NFS_V3 but CONFIG_NFS_V3_MODULE is set. Should I have changed the CONFIG_ variables instead of using IS_ENABLED()?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is it evaluating differently in the include file vs. the .c file?
>>>>>> Are we missing an include in nfs_fs.h?
>>>>>
>>>>> Good question. I don't see any reason that it would evaluate differently, but I'm compiling the .config attached to the initial email to try to figure it out.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looks like the IS_ENABLED() switch got pushed to the next patch for V3 in include/linux/nfs_fs.h. Want me to resend the patches? I took another look at how IS_ENABLED() is defined, and it'll work if I do the switch in the patch before I turn everything into separate modules if you want me to resend everything.
>>>
>>> Please just make it incremental to the patch series that is already
>>> merged in today's nfs-for-3.6.
>>
>> Easy enough, the patch that fixes it is the last one in the series that I sent in yesterday.
>
> I don't understand. That is the patch series that Fengguang was testing
> afaik. His tests were on
I'm guessing he's checking each patch individually and it notified about the first bad one. Here is what happened:
In patch 9 (Convert v3 into a module) one of my calls to IS_ENABLED() somehow got pushed into patch 10. Here is the bit from patch 10 that fixes the problem:
diff --git a/include/linux/nfs_fs.h b/include/linux/nfs_fs.h
index 4b6043c..2889877 100644
--- a/include/linux/nfs_fs.h
+++ b/include/linux/nfs_fs.h
@@ -538,7 +538,7 @@ extern void nfs_writeback_done(struct rpc_task *, struct nfs_write_data *);
extern int nfs_wb_all(struct inode *inode);
extern int nfs_wb_page(struct inode *inode, struct page* page);
extern int nfs_wb_page_cancel(struct inode *inode, struct page* page);
-#if defined(CONFIG_NFS_V3) || defined(CONFIG_NFS_V4)
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NFS_V3) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NFS_V4)
extern int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *, int);
extern struct nfs_commit_data *nfs_commitdata_alloc(void);
extern void nfs_commit_free(struct nfs_commit_data *data);
- Bryan
>
> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>
> which includes your patch series from yesterday, no?
>
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Trond
>>>
>>>>> - Bryan
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
>>>>>>>>> To: Schumaker, Bryan
>>>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected]; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
>>>>>>>>> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Bryan,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kernel build failed on
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
>>>>>>>>> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>>>>>>>>> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
>>>>>>>>> v3 into a module
>>>>>>>>> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All related error/warning messages:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>>>> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
>>>>>>>>> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>>>> was here
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
>>>>>>>>> 1589 return status;
>>>>>>>>> 1590 }
>>>>>>>>> 1591
>>>>>>>>>> 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
>>>>>>>>> 1593 {
>>>>>>>>> 1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
>>>>>>>>> 1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
>>>>>>>>> Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> Intel Corporation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:55:22AM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> I've got one at:
> git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/bjschuma/linux-nfs.git. I don't
> always do a good job keeping it up-to-date, but I can try to get
> into the habit of putting my patches there before submitting them.
Tree added :) By default I'll test every branch of the monitored
trees. You may ask me to permanently blacklist/whitelist some of your
branches. Or, if a topic branch is currently in heavy development and
will become testable eventually, you may temporarily carry a line
Dont-Auto-Build
in any of the branch's commits (in the changelog). Then the script
will skip that branch automatically.
Thanks,
Fengguang
> On 07/31/2012 09:51 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Bryan,
> >
> > Do you have a git tree that I can run tests upon? That would help
> > prevent problems from sneaking into Trond's tree, and hence mess up
> > the maintainer's tree and waste everyone's time.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Fengguang
> >
T24gVHVlLCAyMDEyLTA3LTMxIGF0IDA4OjQ3IC0wNDAwLCBCcnlhbiBTY2h1bWFrZXIgd3JvdGU6
DQo+IE9uIDA3LzMwLzIwMTIgMTE6MTQgUE0sIE15a2xlYnVzdCwgVHJvbmQgd3JvdGU6DQo+ID4g
QnJ5YW4sDQo+ID4gDQo+ID4gV2h5IGRpZCB5b3Ugc3dpdGNoIHRvIHVzaW5nIElTX0VOQUJMRUQg
aW4gdGhlIGZpcnN0IHBsYWNlLCBhbmQgd2h5IHdhc24ndCB0aGF0IHB1dCBpbiBhIHNlcGFyYXRl
IHBhdGNoPw0KPiANCj4gSVNfRU5BQkxFRCgpIHdpbGwgY2hlY2sgZm9yIENPTkZJR19ORlNfVipf
TU9EVUxFLCBsYXN0IEkgY2hlY2tlZCB0aGUgZGVmaW5lZCgpIG1hY3JvIGRvZXNuJ3QuICBQdXR0
aW5nIHRoaXMgaW50byBhIHNlcGFyYXRlIHBhdGNoIG1ha2VzIHRoZSBjaGFuZ2Ugbm9uLWJpc2Vj
dGFibGUgc2luY2UgZ2NjIHdpbGwgYmUgY2hlY2tpbmcgYWdhaW5zdCBDT05GSUdfTkZTX1YzIGJ1
dCBDT05GSUdfTkZTX1YzX01PRFVMRSBpcyBzZXQuICBTaG91bGQgSSBoYXZlIGNoYW5nZWQgdGhl
IENPTkZJR18gdmFyaWFibGVzIGluc3RlYWQgb2YgdXNpbmcgSVNfRU5BQkxFRCgpPw0KDQpXaHkg
aXMgaXQgZXZhbHVhdGluZyBkaWZmZXJlbnRseSBpbiB0aGUgaW5jbHVkZSBmaWxlIHZzLiB0aGUg
LmMgZmlsZT8NCkFyZSB3ZSBtaXNzaW5nIGFuIGluY2x1ZGUgaW4gbmZzX2ZzLmg/DQoNCj4gPiAN
Cj4gPiANCj4gPiANCj4gPj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gPj4gRnJvbTog
RmVuZ2d1YW5nIFd1IFttYWlsdG86ZmVuZ2d1YW5nLnd1QGludGVsLmNvbV0NCj4gPj4gU2VudDog
TW9uZGF5LCBKdWx5IDMwLCAyMDEyIDEwOjQzIFBNDQo+ID4+IFRvOiBTY2h1bWFrZXIsIEJyeWFu
DQo+ID4+IENjOiBrZXJuZWwtamFuaXRvcnNAdmdlci5rZXJuZWwub3JnOyBNeWtsZWJ1c3QsIFRy
b25kOyBsaW51eC0NCj4gPj4gbmZzQHZnZXIua2VybmVsLm9yZw0KPiA+PiBTdWJqZWN0OiBbbmZz
OmRldmVsIDQ2LzUxXSBmcy9uZnMvd3JpdGUuYzoxNTkyOjU6IGVycm9yOiByZWRlZmluaXRpb24g
b2YNCj4gPj4gJ25mc19jb21taXRfaW5vZGUnDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IEhpIEJyeWFuLA0KPiA+Pg0K
PiA+PiBLZXJuZWwgYnVpbGQgZmFpbGVkIG9uDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IHRyZWU6ICAgZ2l0Oi8vZ2l0
LmxpbnV4LW5mcy5vcmcvcHJvamVjdHMvdHJvbmRteS9saW51eC1uZnMuZ2l0IGRldmVsDQo+ID4+
IGhlYWQ6ICAgNWMxM2M5ZTFjMTVlZTJjYTlhYjJiOTUzMjI0MDAxYWY1M2Q5YmUwOQ0KPiA+PiBj
b21taXQ6IDFjNjA2ZmI3NGM3NThiZWFmZDk4Y2JhZDlhOTEzM2VhZGVlYzIzNzEgWzQ2LzUxXSBO
RlM6IENvbnZlcnQNCj4gPj4gdjMgaW50byBhIG1vZHVsZQ0KPiA+PiBjb25maWc6IGJsYWNrZmlu
LUJGNTMzLUVaS0lUX2RlZmNvbmZpZyAoYXR0YWNoZWQgYXMgLmNvbmZpZykNCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4g
QWxsIHJlbGF0ZWQgZXJyb3Ivd2FybmluZyBtZXNzYWdlczoNCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gZnMvbmZzL3dy
aXRlLmM6MTU5Mjo1OiBlcnJvcjogcmVkZWZpbml0aW9uIG9mICduZnNfY29tbWl0X2lub2RlJw0K
PiA+PiBJbiBmaWxlIGluY2x1ZGVkIGZyb20gZnMvbmZzL3dyaXRlLmM6MTk6MDoNCj4gPj4gaW5j
bHVkZS9saW51eC9uZnNfZnMuaDo1NDc6MTogbm90ZTogcHJldmlvdXMgZGVmaW5pdGlvbiBvZiAn
bmZzX2NvbW1pdF9pbm9kZScNCj4gPj4gd2FzIGhlcmUNCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gdmltICsxNTkyIGZz
L25mcy93cml0ZS5jDQo+ID4+ICAgMTU4OQkJcmV0dXJuIHN0YXR1czsNCj4gPj4gICAxNTkwCX0N
Cj4gPj4gICAxNTkxDQo+ID4+PiAxNTkyCWludCBuZnNfY29tbWl0X2lub2RlKHN0cnVjdCBpbm9k
ZSAqaW5vZGUsIGludCBob3cpDQo+ID4+ICAgMTU5Mwl7DQo+ID4+ICAgMTU5NAkJTElTVF9IRUFE
KGhlYWQpOw0KPiA+PiAgIDE1OTUJCXN0cnVjdCBuZnNfY29tbWl0X2luZm8gY2luZm87DQo+ID4+
DQo+ID4+IC0tLQ0KPiA+PiAwLURBWSBrZXJuZWwgYnVpbGQgdGVzdGluZyBiYWNrZW5kICAgICAg
ICAgT3BlbiBTb3VyY2UgVGVjaG5vbG9neSBDZW50cmUNCj4gPj4gRmVuZ2d1YW5nIFd1IDx3ZmdA
bGludXguaW50ZWwuY29tPiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIEludGVsIENvcnBvcmF0aW9uDQo+
IA0KDQo=
On 07/30/2012 11:14 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> Bryan,
>
> Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
IS_ENABLED() will check for CONFIG_NFS_V*_MODULE, last I checked the defined() macro doesn't. Putting this into a separate patch makes the change non-bisectable since gcc will be checking against CONFIG_NFS_V3 but CONFIG_NFS_V3_MODULE is set. Should I have changed the CONFIG_ variables instead of using IS_ENABLED()?
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
>> To: Schumaker, Bryan
>> Cc: [email protected]; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
>> [email protected]
>> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
>> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>
>> Hi Bryan,
>>
>> Kernel build failed on
>>
>> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
>> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
>> v3 into a module
>> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>>
>> All related error/warning messages:
>>
>> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
>> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>> was here
>>
>> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
>> 1589 return status;
>> 1590 }
>> 1591
>>> 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
>> 1593 {
>> 1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
>> 1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>>
>> ---
>> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
>> Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> Intel Corporation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T24gVHVlLCAyMDEyLTA3LTMxIGF0IDIyOjEwICswODAwLCBGZW5nZ3VhbmcgV3Ugd3JvdGU6DQo+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On 07/31/2012 10:16 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:55:22AM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>> I've got one at:
>> git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/bjschuma/linux-nfs.git. I don't
>> always do a good job keeping it up-to-date, but I can try to get
>> into the habit of putting my patches there before submitting them.
>
> Tree added :) By default I'll test every branch of the monitored
> trees. You may ask me to permanently blacklist/whitelist some of your
> branches. Or, if a topic branch is currently in heavy development and
> will become testable eventually, you may temporarily carry a line
>
> Dont-Auto-Build
>
> in any of the branch's commits (in the changelog). Then the script
> will skip that branch automatically.
Sounds good. I'll update it as I work on things!
- Bryan
>
> Thanks,
> Fengguang
>
>> On 07/31/2012 09:51 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>>> Bryan,
>>>
>>> Do you have a git tree that I can run tests upon? That would help
>>> prevent problems from sneaking into Trond's tree, and hence mess up
>>> the maintainer's tree and waste everyone's time.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Fengguang
>>>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==
> > Easy enough, the patch that fixes it is the last one in the series that I sent in yesterday.
>
> I don't understand. That is the patch series that Fengguang was testing
> afaik. His tests were on
>
> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>
> which includes your patch series from yesterday, no?
Trond, I typically do commit-by-commit tests and will complain if
*any* point of the tree is not bisect-able. A fix at the HEAD won't
stop the email notification for a defect in the middle point..
On the other hand, I do maintain a list of non-rebaseable
tree/branches, on which the HEAD commit will be tested first, and only
if any problems are found, go back to find out the first bad commit.
If you prefer the latter behavior, I can add your tree or any branch
of it to the non-rebaseable list.
Thanks,
Fengguang
Bryan,
Do you have a git tree that I can run tests upon? That would help
prevent problems from sneaking into Trond's tree, and hence mess up
the maintainer's tree and waste everyone's time.
Thanks,
Fengguang
Bryan,
Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
> To: Schumaker, Bryan
> Cc: [email protected]; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
> [email protected]
> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>
> Hi Bryan,
>
> Kernel build failed on
>
> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
> v3 into a module
> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>
> All related error/warning messages:
>
> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
> was here
>
> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
> 1589 return status;
> 1590 }
> 1591
> > 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
> 1593 {
> 1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
> 1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>
> ---
> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
> Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> Intel Corporation
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 02:28:21PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 22:10 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > > Easy enough, the patch that fixes it is the last one in the series that I sent in yesterday.
> > >
> > > I don't understand. That is the patch series that Fengguang was testing
> > > afaik. His tests were on
> > >
> > > tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
> > > head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
> > >
> > > which includes your patch series from yesterday, no?
> >
> > Trond, I typically do commit-by-commit tests and will complain if
> > *any* point of the tree is not bisect-able. A fix at the HEAD won't
> > stop the email notification for a defect in the middle point..
> >
> > On the other hand, I do maintain a list of non-rebaseable
> > tree/branches, on which the HEAD commit will be tested first, and only
> > if any problems are found, go back to find out the first bad commit.
> >
> > If you prefer the latter behavior, I can add your tree or any branch
> > of it to the non-rebaseable list.
>
> Ah... I see now... So you are saying that the end result is indeed
> correct, but the bisection fails...
Sorry for the confusions!
> The 'devel' tree is usually a mixture of rebaseable and non-rebaseable:
> anything that is already been committed to the nfs-for-next branch is
> non-rebaseable, while the rest usually is...
Got it. I'll mark 'nfs-for-next' and 'devel' as non-rebaseable, and do
thorough bisect tests on the other branches.
Thanks,
Fengguang
On 07/31/2012 08:55 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:47 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>> On 07/30/2012 11:14 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>> Bryan,
>>>
>>> Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
>>
>> IS_ENABLED() will check for CONFIG_NFS_V*_MODULE, last I checked the defined() macro doesn't. Putting this into a separate patch makes the change non-bisectable since gcc will be checking against CONFIG_NFS_V3 but CONFIG_NFS_V3_MODULE is set. Should I have changed the CONFIG_ variables instead of using IS_ENABLED()?
>
> Why is it evaluating differently in the include file vs. the .c file?
> Are we missing an include in nfs_fs.h?
Good question. I don't see any reason that it would evaluate differently, but I'm compiling the .config attached to the initial email to try to figure it out.
- Bryan
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
>>>> To: Schumaker, Bryan
>>>> Cc: [email protected]; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
>>>> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>
>>>> Hi Bryan,
>>>>
>>>> Kernel build failed on
>>>>
>>>> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
>>>> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>>>> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
>>>> v3 into a module
>>>> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>>>>
>>>> All related error/warning messages:
>>>>
>>>> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
>>>> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>> was here
>>>>
>>>> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
>>>> 1589 return status;
>>>> 1590 }
>>>> 1591
>>>>> 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
>>>> 1593 {
>>>> 1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
>>>> 1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
>>>> Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> Intel Corporation
>>
>
On 07/31/2012 09:05 AM, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> On 07/31/2012 08:55 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:47 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>> On 07/30/2012 11:14 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>> Bryan,
>>>>
>>>> Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
>>>
>>> IS_ENABLED() will check for CONFIG_NFS_V*_MODULE, last I checked the defined() macro doesn't. Putting this into a separate patch makes the change non-bisectable since gcc will be checking against CONFIG_NFS_V3 but CONFIG_NFS_V3_MODULE is set. Should I have changed the CONFIG_ variables instead of using IS_ENABLED()?
>>
>> Why is it evaluating differently in the include file vs. the .c file?
>> Are we missing an include in nfs_fs.h?
>
> Good question. I don't see any reason that it would evaluate differently, but I'm compiling the .config attached to the initial email to try to figure it out.
>
Looks like the IS_ENABLED() switch got pushed to the next patch for V3 in include/linux/nfs_fs.h. Want me to resend the patches? I took another look at how IS_ENABLED() is defined, and it'll work if I do the switch in the patch before I turn everything into separate modules if you want me to resend everything.
> - Bryan
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
>>>>> To: Schumaker, Bryan
>>>>> Cc: [email protected]; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
>>>>> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Bryan,
>>>>>
>>>>> Kernel build failed on
>>>>>
>>>>> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
>>>>> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>>>>> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
>>>>> v3 into a module
>>>>> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>>>>>
>>>>> All related error/warning messages:
>>>>>
>>>>> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
>>>>> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>> was here
>>>>>
>>>>> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
>>>>> 1589 return status;
>>>>> 1590 }
>>>>> 1591
>>>>>> 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
>>>>> 1593 {
>>>>> 1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
>>>>> 1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
>>>>> Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> Intel Corporation
>>>
>>
>
On 07/31/2012 09:33 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:30 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>> On 07/31/2012 09:05 AM, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>> On 07/31/2012 08:55 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:47 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>>>> On 07/30/2012 11:14 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>>>> Bryan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
>>>>>
>>>>> IS_ENABLED() will check for CONFIG_NFS_V*_MODULE, last I checked the defined() macro doesn't. Putting this into a separate patch makes the change non-bisectable since gcc will be checking against CONFIG_NFS_V3 but CONFIG_NFS_V3_MODULE is set. Should I have changed the CONFIG_ variables instead of using IS_ENABLED()?
>>>>
>>>> Why is it evaluating differently in the include file vs. the .c file?
>>>> Are we missing an include in nfs_fs.h?
>>>
>>> Good question. I don't see any reason that it would evaluate differently, but I'm compiling the .config attached to the initial email to try to figure it out.
>>>
>>
>> Looks like the IS_ENABLED() switch got pushed to the next patch for V3 in include/linux/nfs_fs.h. Want me to resend the patches? I took another look at how IS_ENABLED() is defined, and it'll work if I do the switch in the patch before I turn everything into separate modules if you want me to resend everything.
>
> Please just make it incremental to the patch series that is already
> merged in today's nfs-for-3.6.
Easy enough, the patch that fixes it is the last one in the series that I sent in yesterday.
>
> Cheers
> Trond
>
>>> - Bryan
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:[email protected]]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
>>>>>>> To: Schumaker, Bryan
>>>>>>> Cc: [email protected]; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
>>>>>>> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Bryan,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kernel build failed on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tree: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
>>>>>>> head: 5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>>>>>>> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
>>>>>>> v3 into a module
>>>>>>> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All related error/warning messages:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
>>>>>>> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>> was here
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
>>>>>>> 1589 return status;
>>>>>>> 1590 }
>>>>>>> 1591
>>>>>>>> 1592 int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
>>>>>>> 1593 {
>>>>>>> 1594 LIST_HEAD(head);
>>>>>>> 1595 struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend Open Source Technology Centre
>>>>>>> Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> Intel Corporation
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
I've got one at: git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/bjschuma/linux-nfs.git. I don't always do a good job keeping it up-to-date, but I can try to get into the habit of putting my patches there before submitting them.
- Bryan
On 07/31/2012 09:51 AM, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> Bryan,
>
> Do you have a git tree that I can run tests upon? That would help
> prevent problems from sneaking into Trond's tree, and hence mess up
> the maintainer's tree and waste everyone's time.
>
> Thanks,
> Fengguang
>