Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 25 (block ?)

[Sedat Dilek]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2011-10-25 15:10, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> *Note well*
>>>>
>>>> This tree has nate had any build testing at all. ÂAs such, it probably
>>>> doesn't build :-) This tree is really just a roll up of the current state
>>>> of the trees when the v3.2 merge window opened. ÂIt will not be put into
>>>> the build system referred to below.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have generated a single linux-next (next-20111025) patch on top of
>>> v3.1, it's approx. 100M!
>>>
>>> $ du -h patch-v3.1-next-20111025.patch
>>> 96M Â Â patch-v3.1-next-20111025.patch
>>>
>>> I noticed this build-failure:
>>>
>>> ÂCC Â Â Âblock/blk-throttle.o
>>> ÂCC [M] Âfs/fuse/dir.o
>>> /mnt/sdb3/linux-kernel/linux-3.1/debian/build/source_i386_none/block/blk-throttle.c:
>>> In function 'blk_throtl_drain':
>>> /mnt/sdb3/linux-kernel/linux-3.1/debian/build/source_i386_none/block/blk-throttle.c:1221:2:
>>> error: implicit declaration of function 'lockdep_is_held'
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>>>
>>> make[5]: *** [block/blk-throttle.o] Error 1
>>> make[4]: *** [block] Error 2
>>>
>>> This happens with Debian's gcc-4.6 (4.6.1-16) and default
>>> KBUILD_ENABLE_EXTRA_GCC_CHECKS value.
>>>
>>> - Sedat -
>>>
>>
>> Looks like "#include <linux/lockdep.h>" is missing in block/blk-throttle.c?
>
> Hmm, I wonder why it isn't triggering for cfq-iosched.o or elevator.o as
> well. Is blk-throttle modular? What is your .config?
>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
>

CONFIG_BLK_DEV_THROTTLING=y

My kernel-config is attached.


- Sedat -

Attachment: config-3.1.0-next20111025.1-686-small
Description: Binary data