On 28/10/20 2:00 pm, Marco Elver wrote: > On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 at 00:50, kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Arpitha, >> >> Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve: >> >> [auto build test WARNING on ext4/dev] >> [also build test WARNING on linus/master v5.10-rc1 next-20201027] >> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. >> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in >> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch] >> >> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Arpitha-Raghunandan/kunit-Support-for-Parameterized-Testing/20201028-015018 >> base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git dev >> config: mips-randconfig-r016-20201027 (attached as .config) >> compiler: mipsel-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0 >> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): >> wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross >> chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross >> # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/2de1e52708cd83d1dc4c718876683f6809045a98 >> git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux >> git fetch --no-tags linux-review Arpitha-Raghunandan/kunit-Support-for-Parameterized-Testing/20201028-015018 >> git checkout 2de1e52708cd83d1dc4c718876683f6809045a98 >> # save the attached .config to linux build tree >> COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-9.3.0 make.cross ARCH=mips >> >> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate >> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> >> In file included from fs/ext4/inode-test.c:7: >> fs/ext4/inode-test.c: In function 'ext4_inode_gen_params': >>>> include/kunit/test.h:1735:58: warning: return discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers] >> 1735 | return __next - (array) < ARRAY_SIZE((array)) ? __next : NULL; \ >> fs/ext4/inode-test.c:214:1: note: in expansion of macro 'KUNIT_ARRAY_PARAM' >> 214 | KUNIT_ARRAY_PARAM(ext4_inode, test_data); >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > So this means we probably want to make the param_value, and the return > and prev types of the generator "const void*". > > Thanks, > -- Marco > Okay, I'll fix this. Thanks!
