RE: [kbuild-all] Re: [PATCH V2] arm64/hugetlb: Reserve CMA areas for gigantic pages on 16K and 64K configs

["Xia, Hui" <hui.xia@intel.com>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
>Sent: 2020年6月30日 9:05
>To: lkp <lkp@intel.com>; linux-mm@kvack.org
>Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org; robin.murphy@arm.com; Catalin Marinas
><catalin.marinas@arm.com>; Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>; Mark Rutland
><mark.rutland@arm.com>; Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>; Barry
>Song <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>; Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-
>foundation.org>
>Subject: [kbuild-all] Re: [PATCH V2] arm64/hugetlb: Reserve CMA areas for
>gigantic pages on 16K and 64K configs
>
>On 06/29/2020 04:38 PM, kernel test robot wrote:
>> Hi Anshuman,
>>
>> Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve:
>>
>> [auto build test WARNING on v5.8-rc3]
>> [also build test WARNING on next-20200629] [cannot apply to
>> arm64/for-next/core] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree,
>> kindly drop us a note.
>> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use  as documented in
>> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
>>
>> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Anshuman-Khandual/arm64-
>hugetlb-Reserve-CMA-areas-for-gigantic-pages-on-16K-and-64K-
>configs/20200629-144736
>> base:    9ebcfadb0610322ac537dd7aa5d9cbc2b2894c68
>> config: arm64-defconfig (attached as .config)
>> compiler: aarch64-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0 reproduce (this is a W=1
>> build):
>>         wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-
>tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
>>         chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
>>         # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>>         COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-9.3.0 make.cross
>> ARCH=arm64
>>
>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>
>> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>>
>>>> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:40:13: warning: no previous prototype
>>>> for 'arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
>>       40 | void __init arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void)
>>          |             ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>This only comes up with W=1 and I wonder if this is truly a valid warning. Should
>all non-static function needs to have a declaration in a header file ? In this case,
>there is a declaration for this function near the call site itself, why should not that
>be sufficient.
Yes, -Wmissing-prototypes only enabled when make W=1. Kindly refer to FAQ 
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki/LKP-FAQ#how-is-one-meant-to-act-on-w1-reports-like--wmissing-prototypes
please ignore this warning if confirmed it is not a issue here. sorry for inconvenient.

>
>#if defined(CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE) && defined(CONFIG_CMA) void
>arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void); <--------- Declaration #else static inline void
>arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void) { } #endif
>_______________________________________________
>kbuild-all mailing list -- kbuild-all@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to
>kbuild-all-leave@lists.01.org