[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BB8327439DE51911+20240307141837.3c067e2b@winn-pc>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 14:18:37 +0800
From: Winston Wen <wentao@...ontech.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Peter
Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next
Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the ext3 tree
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 11:07:17 +1100
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the ext3 tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from include/linux/sysctl.h:27,
> from include/linux/fanotify.h:5,
> from fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:2:
> fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c: In function 'fanotify_get_response':
> fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:233:48: error: suggest parentheses
> around arithmetic in operand of '|' [-Werror=parentheses] 233 |
> TASK_KILLABLE|TASK_FREEZABLE); |
> ^ include/linux/wait.h:283:11:
> note: in definition of macro '___wait_is_interruptible' 283 |
> (state & (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_WAKEKILL))) | ^~~~~
> include/linux/wait.h:935:9: note: in expansion of macro
> '___wait_event' 935 | ___wait_event(wq, condition, state, 0,
> 0, schedule()) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> include/linux/wait.h:958:25: note: in expansion of macro
> '__wait_event_state' 958 | __ret =
> __wait_event_state(wq_head, condition, state); \ |
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c:231:15: note: in expansion of macro
> 'wait_event_state' 231 | ret =
> wait_event_state(group->fanotify_data.access_waitq, |
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 3440e7e55ced ("fanotify: allow freeze when waiting response for
> permission events")
>
> Though, I guess, you could argue that the ___wait_is_interruptible
> macro should parenthesise the use of its "state" argument.
>
> I have used the ext3 tree from next-20240306 for today.
>
Sorry I missed this warning. And agreed! I can add parentheses on the
call side, but it may be more reasonable to add them in the macro.
Hey Peter,
Could you please take a look at the patch attached at your convenience?
Thanks!
--
Thanks,
Winston
View attachment "0001-wait-add-parentheses-to-state-argument-in-macro.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1297 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists