[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201207081556.pwxmhgdxayzbofpi@lion.mk-sys.cz>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 09:15:56 +0100
From: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/filemap: add static for function
__add_to_page_cache_locked
On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 08:18:57AM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>
>
> 在 2020/11/11 上午3:50, Andrew Morton 写道:
> > On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:39:24 +0530 Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 4:55 PM Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Otherwise it cause gcc warning:
> >>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>> ../mm/filemap.c:830:14: warning: no previous prototype for
> >>> ‘__add_to_page_cache_locked’ [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> >>> noinline int __add_to_page_cache_locked(struct page *page,
> >>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>
> >> Is CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF enabled in your .config ?
> >
> > hm, yes.
>
> When the config enabled, compiling looks good untill pahole tool
> used to get BTF info, but I still failed on a right version pahole
> > 1.16. Sorry.
>
> >
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
> >>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> >>> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
> >>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> >>> ---
> >>> mm/filemap.c | 2 +-
> >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> >>> index d90614f501da..249cf489f5df 100644
> >>> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> >>> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> >>> @@ -827,7 +827,7 @@ int replace_page_cache_page(struct page *old, struct page *new, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> >>> }
> >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(replace_page_cache_page);
> >>>
> >>> -noinline int __add_to_page_cache_locked(struct page *page,
> >>> +static noinline int __add_to_page_cache_locked(struct page *page,
> >>> struct address_space *mapping,
> >>> pgoff_t offset, gfp_t gfp,
> >>> void **shadowp)
> >
> > It's unclear to me whether BTF_ID() requires that the target symbol be
> > non-static. It doesn't actually reference the symbol:
> >
> > #define BTF_ID(prefix, name) \
> > __BTF_ID(__ID(__BTF_ID__##prefix##__##name##__))
> >
>
> The above usage make me thought BTF don't require the symbol, though
> the symbol still exist in vmlinux with 'static'.
>
> So any comments of this, Alexei?
It's probably more complicated: our v5.10-rc7 builds with
CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF=y fail on ppc64 and ppc64le with
BTFIDS vmlinux
FAILED unresolved symbol __add_to_page_cache_locked
but succeed on x86_64, i586, aarch64 and s390x. So far I don't see why
this should depend on architecture.
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists