On 10/14/19 9:45 AM, Ira Weiny wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 08:14:04PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >> On 10/14/19 7:22 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: >>> On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 11:43:10PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: >>>> On 10/13/19 11:12 PM, kbuild test robot wrote: >>>>> Hi John, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for the patch! Yet something to improve: >>>>> >>>>> [auto build test ERROR on linus/master] >>>>> [cannot apply to v5.4-rc3 next-20191011] >>>>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help >>>>> improve the system. BTW, we also suggest to use '--base' option to specify the >>>>> base tree in git format-patch, please see https://stackoverflow.com/a/37406982] >>>>> >>>>> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/John-Hubbard/gup-c-gup_benchmark-c-trivial-fixes-before-the-storm/20191014-114158 >>>>> config: powerpc-defconfig (attached as .config) >>>>> compiler: powerpc64-linux-gcc (GCC) 7.4.0 >>>>> reproduce: >>>>> wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross >>>>> chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross >>>>> # save the attached .config to linux build tree >>>>> GCC_VERSION=7.4.0 make.cross ARCH=powerpc >>>>> >>>>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag >>>>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): >>>>> >>>>> mm/gup.c: In function 'gup_hugepte': >>>>>>> mm/gup.c:1990:33: error: 'write' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'writeq'? >>>>> if (!pte_access_permitted(pte, write)) >>>>> ^~~~~ >>>>> writeq >>>>> mm/gup.c:1990:33: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in >>>>> >>>> >>>> OK, so this shows that my cross-compiler test scripts are faulty lately, >>>> sorry I missed this. >>>> >>>> But more importantly, the above missed case is an example of when "write" really >>>> means "write", as opposed to meaning flags. >>>> >>>> Please put this patch on hold or drop it, until we hear from the authors as to how >>>> they would like to resolve this. I suspect it will end up as something like: >>>> >>>> bool write = (flags & FOLL_WRITE); >>>> >>>> ...perhaps? >>> >>> Just use >>> >>> if (!pte_access_permitted(pte, flags & FOLL_WRITE)) >>> >>> as we have in gup_pte_range(). >>> >>> And add: >>> >>> Fixes: cbd34da7dc9a ("mm: move the powerpc hugepd code to mm/gup.c") >>> >> >> b798bec4741bdd80224214fdd004c8e52698e42 isn't this the commit that need to >> be mentioned in the Fixes: tag? > > Yes, and while we are at it the type should probably be changed to unsigned > int. > OK, I'm posting a v2 with all the above, thanks for these reviews! thanks, John Hubbard NVIDIA
