From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9674EC46CD4 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 11:37:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E821E6B0114; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:37:26 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E0B1C6B0115; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:37:26 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C84AD6B0116; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:37:26 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B270D6B0114 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:37:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88EEDA01CE for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 11:37:26 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81619655292.28.75B8EBB Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by imf29.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5866B12000D for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 11:37:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=VsTiCJnK; spf=pass (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of lkp@intel.com designates 134.134.136.126 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=lkp@intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1703849844; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Y/hbV4jEUhiAMJ8w8JbUXWup3esuZ5+Vg+BiYl3Yi+7+JQe3Rlwfa8d9PWvGuHo6fipRFW PE75ETD8fNwd3Bzg0VcZZG/PY+FXwx2q8v40QDG3XLRoo/cwgZ+B+9nggas7uHmeICbQZG PNLPCo389p1y2erZLm/sukUQDKMjhhE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=VsTiCJnK; spf=pass (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of lkp@intel.com designates 134.134.136.126 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=lkp@intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1703849844; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=Ds1h4RcJ8Mag8Aq210LRrBMK9pjgTg7tb9CgoG1wGF0=; b=RBnuuS+WbS+TG39I/1Fq3jpV6XADmGQjcYUsPkZfOCkqEB97dwMaDY9W6zDbm/aYMxg5v8 U1fT+JAJGq4NKy+LcbwNzX6U8usA72Js93YrPsZ21Guu9Kivig3Qq5EJmyk2xfGUm45HGd xmGlBTNzu+/AM+WuASUVChuRDs205f4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1703849843; x=1735385843; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=jXpLHm3Y0MAniZ7pNG5aFvqoCCSnZ/QB13PROwYSaT8=; b=VsTiCJnKjipKagPx3EuxRf4MOd1FGTs2CmNjFt2QEpByNpQd5g+xrKKT IOWX4lq3HUPfqaSN+lDcsHyIQ5z2aMiAIXKarAZcG82v0gGEcE5SMDvCm h9BVnJJJimXVvSTrrmtKiNuPEbxg6RtKzTFMi8PQlPFej9hlHc6ElNUzR EV4MZUVFqlFx5uxWsya90xKb+pRzwvkhh8thqJJ2Wqpi3jH0RUks/P9rZ CTxFyGBkf34KOr9QmyPkHd8BBH99OkwyVyc6FXmHAKNADmEtVb7jLfpNP k0qxCbJxizEWbXi2kL5mkTKLYljzttWoWY3tJKkV3g2N4wh/ZZt6SyYSk A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10937"; a="381615576" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.04,314,1695711600"; d="scan'208";a="381615576" Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Dec 2023 03:37:05 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10937"; a="771950637" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.04,314,1695711600"; d="scan'208";a="771950637" Received: from lkp-server02.sh.intel.com (HELO b07ab15da5fe) ([10.239.97.151]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 29 Dec 2023 03:36:59 -0800 Received: from kbuild by b07ab15da5fe with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1rJBAe-000HOd-0D; Fri, 29 Dec 2023 11:36:56 +0000 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2023 19:35:58 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Matthew Wilcox , "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, Maria Yu , kernel@quicinc.com, quic_pkondeti@quicinc.com, keescook@chromium.or, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, dhowells@redhat.com, jarkko@kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] kernel: Introduce a write lock/unlock wrapper for tasklist_lock Message-ID: <202312291936.G87eGfCo-lkp@intel.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam08 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5866B12000D X-Stat-Signature: jy9j3zdsehkssm9pzszraug4dt9qw8xd X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1703849843-99088 X-HE-Meta: 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 Dd/hXL7p /qTfHsezvhymbW5wf6gq5OdRT9Cg3UBGxA2LIh7Sa8zVsRbMmo2rpjxUULUiWF77ic/eaJYproaUW1/sQ9SX3Fgzz2HjxdgBESOF9Nk53ypN9AtOiyUq4Mln/8HkYvk8iU/aZ8IC4wm9cnKlyICfzmuv9V6DyCVe28NXKli1imNKLTjjZYjLNE7PAfRdLRylyHoad0n6Gs2EEEvFv1HhgCQ/74xtNPidGJEXSUx8zyV5SMkLdhZ2ZgZ+UWHSKR+OKwjia4Lc2GfLxH5dVe2LAvlWf9IIuY1tuqP7JIHBRSXQnHvqQjlf1mcZXxUdfcRbpXTtHr9oT9Q4SPOHlmcX2dGVJME2hIiLDKzWjIJVpeO8sjdSc/CqQKD2O39uYq1JpOEU29VAT3oxZLjS6R1hZoS/XZ9BBue5zwQtgxd+/WWpvudZ5IOGai3QOfTcpVisTMNMgdQBK6JF1oOhKLvroablPwi+Cy70Nh1lG X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Hi Matthew, kernel test robot noticed the following build errors: [auto build test ERROR on tip/locking/core] [also build test ERROR on arnd-asm-generic/master brauner-vfs/vfs.all vfs-idmapping/for-next linus/master v6.7-rc7 next-20231222] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Matthew-Wilcox/Re-PATCH-kernel-Introduce-a-write-lock-unlock-wrapper-for-tasklist_lock/20231229-062352 base: tip/locking/core patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZY30k7OCtxrdR9oP%40casper.infradead.org patch subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: Introduce a write lock/unlock wrapper for tasklist_lock config: i386-randconfig-011-20231229 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231229/202312291936.G87eGfCo-lkp@intel.com/config) compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231229/202312291936.G87eGfCo-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags | Reported-by: kernel test robot | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202312291936.G87eGfCo-lkp@intel.com/ All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c: In function 'do_raw_write_lock_irq': >> kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c:217:9: error: implicit declaration of function 'arch_write_lock_irq'; did you mean '_raw_write_lock_irq'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] 217 | arch_write_lock_irq(&lock->raw_lock); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | _raw_write_lock_irq cc1: some warnings being treated as errors vim +217 kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c 213 214 void do_raw_write_lock_irq(rwlock_t *lock) 215 { 216 debug_write_lock_before(lock); > 217 arch_write_lock_irq(&lock->raw_lock); 218 debug_write_lock_after(lock); 219 } 220 -- 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki