linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip 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]

Message-ID: <CAOi1vP8wsFDzmdwHw8HwvuycPnOChAjzAOLgajLHqxMadoWojQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Jul 2019 20:21:33 +0200
From:   Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     Sage Weil <sage@...dream.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 2:01 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 16:54:59 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > drivers/block/rbd.c: In function 'wake_lock_waiters':
> > drivers/block/rbd.c:3933:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'lockdep_assert_held_exclusive'; did you mean 'lockdep_assert_held_write'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >   lockdep_assert_held_exclusive(&rbd_dev->lock_rwsem);
> >   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >   lockdep_assert_held_write
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> >   9ffbe8ac05db ("locking/lockdep: Rename lockdep_assert_held_exclusive() -> lockdep_assert_held_write()")
> >
> > interacting with commits
> >
> >   637cd060537d ("rbd: new exclusive lock wait/wake code")
> >   a2b1da09793d ("rbd: lock should be quiesced on reacquire")
> >
> > from the ceph tree.
> >
> > I have added the following merge fix patch for today.
> >
> > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> > Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 16:46:12 +1000
> > Subject: [PATCH] rbd: fix up for lockdep_assert_held_exclusive rename
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> > ---
> >  drivers/block/rbd.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/block/rbd.c b/drivers/block/rbd.c
> > index 723c3ef4bd59..02216fbdb854 100644
> > --- a/drivers/block/rbd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/block/rbd.c
> > @@ -3930,7 +3930,7 @@ static void wake_lock_waiters(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev, int result)
> >       struct rbd_img_request *img_req;
> >
> >       dout("%s rbd_dev %p result %d\n", __func__, rbd_dev, result);
> > -     lockdep_assert_held_exclusive(&rbd_dev->lock_rwsem);
> > +     lockdep_assert_held_write(&rbd_dev->lock_rwsem);
> >
> >       cancel_delayed_work(&rbd_dev->lock_dwork);
> >       if (!completion_done(&rbd_dev->acquire_wait)) {
> > @@ -4209,7 +4209,7 @@ static bool rbd_quiesce_lock(struct rbd_device *rbd_dev)
> >       bool need_wait;
> >
> >       dout("%s rbd_dev %p\n", __func__, rbd_dev);
> > -     lockdep_assert_held_exclusive(&rbd_dev->lock_rwsem);
> > +     lockdep_assert_held_write(&rbd_dev->lock_rwsem);
> >
> >       if (rbd_dev->lock_state != RBD_LOCK_STATE_LOCKED)
> >               return false;
>
> This fix now needs to be applied to the merge of the ceph tree.

Hi Stephen,

Yes, that is what I figured would happen.  I assume you would keep
carrying this fixup until the ceph tree is merged.

Thanks,

                Ilya