linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 4 Jul 2017 08:15:57 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 08:54:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jall,
> 
> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (s390x
> s390-defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c:293:10: error: 'BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY' undeclared (first use in this function)
> drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c:327:9: error: 'BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_OK' undeclared (first use in this function)
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   fc17b6534eb8 ("blk-mq: switch ->queue_rq return value to blk_status_t")
> 
> interacting with commit
> 
>   12d907626539 ("s390/scm: convert to blk-mq")
> 
> from the s390 tree.
> 
> Is the following the correct merge fixup?
> 

The failure made int into Linus' tree, but the fix didn't. Is the fix pending
in some other queue or does it have to be (re-)submitted ?

Guenter

> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:51:32 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] s390: fix up for "blk-mq: switch ->queue_rq return value to
>  blk_status_t"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> ---
>  drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c
> index 42018a20f2b7..2cd6123c8f18 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c
> @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>  	spin_lock(&sq->lock);
>  	if (!scm_permit_request(bdev, req)) {
>  		spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -		return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY;
> +		return BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
>  	}
>  
>  	scmrq = sq->scmrq;
> @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>  		if (!scmrq) {
>  			SCM_LOG(5, "no request");
>  			spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -			return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY;
> +			return BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
>  		}
>  		scm_request_init(bdev, scmrq);
>  		sq->scmrq = scmrq;
> @@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>  
>  		sq->scmrq = NULL;
>  		spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -		return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY;
> +		return BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
>  	}
>  	blk_mq_start_request(req);
>  
> @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>  		sq->scmrq = NULL;
>  	}
>  	spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -	return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_OK;
> +	return BLK_STS_OK;
>  }
>  
>  static int scm_blk_init_hctx(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, void *data,