Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1260188 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-01 17:00 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-11-01 23:00 +0100 |
| Articles | 5 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2015-11-01 17:00 +0100
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> - 2015-11-01 17:10 +0100
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> - 2015-11-01 17:10 +0100
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> - 2015-11-01 19:40 +0100
Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> - 2015-11-01 23:00 +0100
| From | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 17:00 +0100 |
| Subject | linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree |
| Message-ID | <qq3d0-1Nu-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Hi Andrew,
Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
block/blk-mq.c
between commit:
3ef28e83ab15 ("block: generic request_queue reference counting")
from the block tree and commit:
7cc8e61bde7a ("mm, page_alloc: distinguish between being unable to sleep, unwilling to sleep and avoiding waking kswapd")
415a13cc1c3c ("mm, page_alloc: rename __GFP_WAIT to __GFP_RECLAIM")
from the akpm-current tree.
I fixed it up (the code updated in the latter was moved by the former,
so I applied the following merge fix patch) and can carry the fix as
necessary (no action is required).
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 02:49:02 +1100
Subject: [PATCH] block: fixes for __GPF_WAIT changes
Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
---
block/blk-core.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index 9e32f0868e36..6f2c263f478b 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -638,7 +638,7 @@ int blk_queue_enter(struct request_queue *q, gfp_t gfp)
if (percpu_ref_tryget_live(&q->q_usage_counter))
return 0;
- if (!(gfp & __GFP_WAIT))
+ if (!gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
return -EBUSY;
ret = wait_event_interruptible(q->mq_freeze_wq,
@@ -2038,7 +2038,7 @@ void generic_make_request(struct bio *bio)
do {
struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev);
- if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_WAIT) == 0)) {
+ if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
q->make_request_fn(q, bio);
--
2.6.1
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 17:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qq3mG-27l-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1260188 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Hi Stephen,
[auto build test ERROR on block/for-next -- if it's inappropriate base, please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Stephen-Rothwell/linux-next-manual-merge-of-the-akpm-current-tree-with-the-block-tree/20151101-235406
config: x86_64-randconfig-x019-201544 (attached as .config)
reproduce:
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
make ARCH=x86_64
All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
block/blk-core.c: In function 'blk_queue_enter':
>> block/blk-core.c:641:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'gfpflags_allow_blocking' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
if (!gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
^
In file included from include/linux/linkage.h:4:0,
from include/linux/kernel.h:6,
from block/blk-core.c:14:
block/blk-core.c: In function 'generic_make_request':
>> block/blk-core.c:2041:33: error: '__GFP_RECLAIM' undeclared (first use in this function)
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
include/linux/compiler.h:165:40: note: in definition of macro 'likely'
# define likely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
^
block/blk-core.c:2041:33: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
include/linux/compiler.h:165:40: note: in definition of macro 'likely'
# define likely(x) __builtin_expect(!!(x), 1)
^
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
vim +/gfpflags_allow_blocking +641 block/blk-core.c
635 while (true) {
636 int ret;
637
638 if (percpu_ref_tryget_live(&q->q_usage_counter))
639 return 0;
640
> 641 if (!gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
642 return -EBUSY;
643
644 ret = wait_event_interruptible(q->mq_freeze_wq,
---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 17:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qq3mG-27l-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1260188 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Hi Stephen,
[auto build test WARNING on block/for-next -- if it's inappropriate base, please suggest rules for selecting the more suitable base]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Stephen-Rothwell/linux-next-manual-merge-of-the-akpm-current-tree-with-the-block-tree/20151101-235406
config: x86_64-randconfig-x018-201544 (attached as .config)
reproduce:
# save the attached .config to linux build tree
make ARCH=x86_64
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
In file included from include/linux/linkage.h:4:0,
from include/linux/kernel.h:6,
from block/blk-core.c:14:
block/blk-core.c: In function 'blk_queue_enter':
block/blk-core.c:641:8: error: implicit declaration of function 'gfpflags_allow_blocking' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
if (!gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
^
include/linux/compiler.h:147:28: note: in definition of macro '__trace_if'
if (__builtin_constant_p((cond)) ? !!(cond) : \
^
>> block/blk-core.c:641:3: note: in expansion of macro 'if'
if (!gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
^
block/blk-core.c: In function 'generic_make_request':
block/blk-core.c:2041:33: error: '__GFP_RECLAIM' undeclared (first use in this function)
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
include/linux/compiler.h:147:28: note: in definition of macro '__trace_if'
if (__builtin_constant_p((cond)) ? !!(cond) : \
^
block/blk-core.c:2041:3: note: in expansion of macro 'if'
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
>> block/blk-core.c:2041:7: note: in expansion of macro 'likely'
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
block/blk-core.c:2041:33: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
include/linux/compiler.h:147:28: note: in definition of macro '__trace_if'
if (__builtin_constant_p((cond)) ? !!(cond) : \
^
block/blk-core.c:2041:3: note: in expansion of macro 'if'
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
>> block/blk-core.c:2041:7: note: in expansion of macro 'likely'
if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
^
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
vim +/if +641 block/blk-core.c
625 }
626
627 struct request_queue *blk_alloc_queue(gfp_t gfp_mask)
628 {
629 return blk_alloc_queue_node(gfp_mask, NUMA_NO_NODE);
630 }
631 EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_alloc_queue);
632
633 int blk_queue_enter(struct request_queue *q, gfp_t gfp)
634 {
635 while (true) {
636 int ret;
637
638 if (percpu_ref_tryget_live(&q->q_usage_counter))
639 return 0;
640
> 641 if (!gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
642 return -EBUSY;
643
644 ret = wait_event_interruptible(q->mq_freeze_wq,
645 !atomic_read(&q->mq_freeze_depth) ||
646 blk_queue_dying(q));
647 if (blk_queue_dying(q))
648 return -ENODEV;
649 if (ret)
---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 19:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qq5HP-3pv-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1260188 |
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 02:51:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the akpm-current tree got a conflict in:
>
> block/blk-mq.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 3ef28e83ab15 ("block: generic request_queue reference counting")
>
> from the block tree and commit:
>
> 7cc8e61bde7a ("mm, page_alloc: distinguish between being unable to sleep, unwilling to sleep and avoiding waking kswapd")
> 415a13cc1c3c ("mm, page_alloc: rename __GFP_WAIT to __GFP_RECLAIM")
>
> from the akpm-current tree.
>
> I fixed it up (the code updated in the latter was moved by the former,
> so I applied the following merge fix patch) and can carry the fix as
> necessary (no action is required).
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 02:49:02 +1100
> Subject: [PATCH] block: fixes for __GPF_WAIT changes
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> ---
> block/blk-core.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
> index 9e32f0868e36..6f2c263f478b 100644
> --- a/block/blk-core.c
> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> @@ -638,7 +638,7 @@ int blk_queue_enter(struct request_queue *q, gfp_t gfp)
> if (percpu_ref_tryget_live(&q->q_usage_counter))
> return 0;
>
> - if (!(gfp & __GFP_WAIT))
> + if (!gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
> return -EBUSY;
>
> ret = wait_event_interruptible(q->mq_freeze_wq,
> @@ -2038,7 +2038,7 @@ void generic_make_request(struct bio *bio)
> do {
> struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev);
>
> - if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_WAIT) == 0)) {
> + if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
>
> q->make_request_fn(q, bio);
>
Hi Stephen,
___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is more appropriate than __GFP_RECLAIM in the
second hunk.
Thanks.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-01 23:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree |
| Message-ID | <qq8Pn-5dJ-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1260217 |
Hi Mel,
On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 18:38:53 +0000 Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 02:51:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > @@ -2038,7 +2038,7 @@ void generic_make_request(struct bio *bio)
> > do {
> > struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev);
> >
> > - if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_WAIT) == 0)) {
> > + if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) {
> >
> > q->make_request_fn(q, bio);
>
> ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is more appropriate than __GFP_RECLAIM in the
> second hunk.
OK, I have done that for today, thanks.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web