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]

Message-ID: <224c2147-36fe-93ed-41a5-a4609b59b4a2@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Mar 2022 12:54:14 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the akpm-current
 tree

On Thu, 24 Mar 2022, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 17:02:45 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > 
> > After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> > produced these warnings:
> > 
> > include/linux/mm_types.h:272: warning: Function parameter or member '__filler' not described in 'folio'
> > include/linux/mm_types.h:272: warning: Function parameter or member 'mlock_count' not described in 'folio'
> > 
> > Introduced by commit
> > 
> >   60a5c5ab0ba7 ("mm/munlock: maintain page->mlock_count while unevictable")
> 
> I am still getting these warnings.  That commit is now
> 
>   07ca76067308 ("mm/munlock: maintain page->mlock_count while unevictable")
> 
> in Linus' tree :-(

Sorry about that Stephen: back in Feb I expected Matthew to have strong
feelings about it, and it wouldn't have been helpful for me to mess it
around at that time.

But I'll reply to this now with my suggested patch: which Matthew may
not like (he may consider it a retrograde step), but unless he NAKs it
and comes up with something we all like better, it should do for now.

I did try to 'make htmldocs' for the first time, but was put off by all
the new packages I was asked to install - not a good use of time.  And
I'm so ignorant that I do not even know if "/* public: */" is a helpful
comment or a special annotation.

Patch follows...
Hugh