From: Heiko Carstens Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ext4 bitops Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:24:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20080204092436.GB7530@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> References: <20080201200208.GA28274@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org> <20080201122257.9524c2bb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080201210404.GA31271@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org> <20080203121238.GD18211@osiris.ibm.com> <20080204045025.GA7494@skywalker> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Bastian Blank , Andrew Morton , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Development , Linux/PPC Development , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080204045025.GA7494@skywalker> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org > > > > | fs/ext4/mballoc.c: In function 'ext4_mb_generate_buddy': > > > > | fs/ext4/mballoc.c:954: error: implicit declaration of function 'generic_find_next_le_bit' > > > > > > > > The s390 specific bitops uses parts of the generic implementation. > > > > Include the correct header. > > > > > > That doesn't work: > > > > > > fs/built-in.o: In function `ext4_mb_release_inode_pa': > > > mballoc.c:(.text+0x95a8a): undefined reference to `generic_find_next_le_bit' > > > fs/built-in.o: In function `ext4_mb_init_cache': > > > mballoc.c:(.text+0x967ea): undefined reference to `generic_find_next_le_bit' > > > > > > This still needs generic_find_next_le_bit which comes > > > from lib/find_next_bit.c. That one doesn't get built on s390 since we > > > don't set GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT. > > > Currently we have the lengthly patch below queued. > > > > Similar issue on m68k. As Bastian also saw it on powerpc, I'm getting the > > impression the ext4 people don't (compile) test on big endian machines? > > > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > > > I have sent this patches to linux-arch expecting a review from > different arch people. It is true that the patches are tested only on > powerpc, x86-64, x86. That's the primary reason of me sending the > patches to linux-arch. Is there anything special I need to do so the ext4 code actually uses ext2_find_next_bit() ? Haven't looked at the ext4 code, but I'd like to test if the s390 implementation is ok.