linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the akpm-current tree

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:   Fri, 25 Aug 2017 14:23:48 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Changwei Ge <ge.changwei@....com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@...sity.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the akpm-current tree

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 08:15:30 +0000 Changwei Ge <ge.changwei@....com> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
> On 2017/8/24 15:42, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Andrew, After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next
> > build (x86_64 allmodconfig) produced these warnings:
> > fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c: In function 'dlm_free_dead_locks':
> > fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c:2306:6: warning: unused variable 'i'
> > [-Wunused-variable] int i; ^ fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c:2305:20:
> > warning: unused variable 'queue' [-Wunused-variable] struct list_head
> > *queue = NULL; ^ 
> My patch never defines these two variables, it's strange that they are
> defined within the patch you collected.
> Could you please help to check if this patch comes from mail '[PATCH]
> ocfs2: re-queue AST or BAST if sending is failed to improve the
> reliability' sent on 7, August.

Yes, I'm not at all sure how those lines got there.

Problem is, the patch you sent was wordwrapped and had its tabs
replaced with spaces.  So I had to do quite a lot of work on it to make
it usable.  Evidently I somehow added those lines in the process.

Please carefully check that

http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/ocfs2-re-queue-ast-or-bast-if-sending-is-failed-to-improve-the-reliability.patch

plus

--- a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c~ocfs2-re-queue-ast-or-bast-if-sending-is-failed-to-improve-the-reliability-fix
+++ a/fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmrecovery.c
@@ -2302,8 +2302,6 @@ static void dlm_free_dead_locks(struct d
 	struct dlm_lock *lock, *next;
 	unsigned int freed = 0;
 	int reserved_tmp = 0;
-	struct list_head *queue = NULL;
-	int i;
 
 	/* this node is the lockres master:
 	 * 1) remove any stale locks for the dead node

produce the correct result.

And please appropriately configure your email client for next time!