linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 00/16] Introduce the BFQ I/O scheduler

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:01:44 +0200
From:   Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "fchecconi@...il.com" <fchecconi@...il.com>,
        "linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@...il.com>,
        "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>,
        "ulf.hansson@...aro.org" <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 00/16] Introduce the BFQ I/O scheduler

> Il giorno 11 apr 2017, alle ore 20:31, Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com> ha scritto:
> 
> On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 19:37 +0200, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> Just pushed:
>> https://github.com/Algodev-github/bfq-mq/tree/add-bfq-mq-logical
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> But are you aware that the code on that branch doesn't build?
> 
> $ make all
> [ ... ]
> ERROR: "bfq_mark_bfqq_busy" [block/bfq-wf2q.ko] undefined!
> ERROR: "bfqg_stats_update_dequeue" [block/bfq-wf2q.ko] undefined!
> [ ... ]
> 
> $ PAGER= git grep bfq_mark_bfqq_busy
> block/bfq-wf2q.c:       bfq_mark_bfqq_busy(bfqq);
> 

That's exactly the complain of the kbuild test robot.  As I wrote,
build completes with no problem in my test system (Ubuntu 16.04, gcc
5.4.0), even with the exact offending tree and .config that the robot
reports.

I didn't understand what is going on.  In your case, as well as for
the test robot, the compilation of the file block/bfq-wf2q.c as a
module component fails, because that file does not contain the
definition of the reported functions.  But that definition is
(uniquely) in the file block/bfq-iosched.c, which is to be compiled
with the former file, according to the following rule in
block/Makefile:
obj-$(CONFIG_IOSCHED_BFQ)       += bfq-iosched.o bfq-wf2q.o bfq-cgroup.o

I have tried all combinations of configurations for bfq (builti-in or
module, with or without cgrousp support), always successfully.  If it
makes any sense to share this information, these are the exact
commands I used to test al combinations (in addition to make full
builds in some cases, and try make all as in your case):

make O=builddir M=block

and

make O=builddir M=block modules

Where is my mistake?

Thanks,
Paolo

> Bart.