>-----Original Message----- >From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@xxxxxxx> >Sent: 2020年6月30日 9:05 >To: lkp <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx >Cc: kbuild-all@xxxxxxxxxxxx; robin.murphy@xxxxxxx; Catalin Marinas ><catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>; Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>; Mark Rutland ><mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>; Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx>; Barry >Song <song.bao.hua@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Andrew Morton <akpm@linux- >foundation.org> >Subject: [kbuild-all] Re: [PATCH V2] arm64/hugetlb: Reserve CMA areas for >gigantic pages on 16K and 64K configs > >On 06/29/2020 04:38 PM, kernel test robot wrote: >> Hi Anshuman, >> >> Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve: >> >> [auto build test WARNING on v5.8-rc3] >> [also build test WARNING on next-20200629] [cannot apply to >> arm64/for-next/core] [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, >> kindly drop us a note. >> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use as documented in >> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch] >> >> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Anshuman-Khandual/arm64- >hugetlb-Reserve-CMA-areas-for-gigantic-pages-on-16K-and-64K- >configs/20200629-144736 >> base: 9ebcfadb0610322ac537dd7aa5d9cbc2b2894c68 >> config: arm64-defconfig (attached as .config) >> compiler: aarch64-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 >> # save the attached .config to linux build tree >> COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-9.3.0 make.cross >> ARCH=arm64 >> >> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate >> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> >>>> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:40:13: warning: no previous prototype >>>> for 'arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve' [-Wmissing-prototypes] >> 40 | void __init arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void) >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >This only comes up with W=1 and I wonder if this is truly a valid warning. Should >all non-static function needs to have a declaration in a header file ? In this case, >there is a declaration for this function near the call site itself, why should not that >be sufficient. Yes, -Wmissing-prototypes only enabled when make W=1. Kindly refer to FAQ https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki/LKP-FAQ#how-is-one-meant-to-act-on-w1-reports-like--wmissing-prototypes please ignore this warning if confirmed it is not a issue here. sorry for inconvenient. > >#if defined(CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE) && defined(CONFIG_CMA) void >arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void); <--------- Declaration #else static inline void >arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void) { } #endif >_______________________________________________ >kbuild-all mailing list -- kbuild-all@xxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to >kbuild-all-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxx
