On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 06:21:06PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > On 2020/11/3 下午5:47, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 10:43 AM Naresh Kamboju > > <naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Linux next 20201103 tag make modules failed for i386 and arm > >> architecture builds. > >> > >> Error log: > >> LD [M] fs/btrfs/btrfs.o > >> MODPOST Module.symvers > >> ERROR: modpost: "__udivdi3" [fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko] undefined! > >> scripts/Makefile.modpost:111: recipe for target 'Module.symvers' failed > >> make[2]: *** [Module.symvers] Error 1 > >> > >> Full build log, > >> https://ci.linaro.org/view/lkft/job/openembedded-lkft-linux-next/DISTRO=lkft,MACHINE=intel-core2-32,label=docker-lkft/891/consoleText > >> https://ci.linaro.org/view/lkft/job/openembedded-lkft-linux-next/DISTRO=lkft,MACHINE=am57xx-evm,label=docker-lkft/891/consoleText > >> > >> -- > >> Linaro LKFT > >> https://lkft.linaro.org > > > > Yeah, I had a look earlier today, thanks to the kisskb builder, and > > the btrfs people are working on a fix. > > Interestingly, the issue was reported in September, and still entered > > linux-next, so we all had a great time to look into it ;-) > > Yeah, we all know that and how to fix it (just call do_div64() for u64 / > u32). > But at that time we're already working on a better solution, other than > using do_div64(), we use sectorsize_bits shift to replace the division, > and unfortunately the bit shift fix didn't get merged until recently. > > Considering that patch is only designed to be merged after the bit shift > fix patch, we're not that concerned. (Until some other guys are > complaining about the linux-next branch). I've pushed updated for-next that uses the sectorsize_bits.
