On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 at 12:38, Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 05:55:51PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: > > Following x86 and i386 build regressions noticed on Linux next-20231128 tag. > > > > Build log: > > ----------- > > fs/btrfs/super.c: In function 'btrfs_parse_param': > > fs/btrfs/super.c:416:25: error: 'ret' undeclared (first use in this > > function); did you mean 'net'? > > 416 | ret = -EINVAL; > > | ^~~ > > | net > > fs/btrfs/super.c:416:25: note: each undeclared identifier is reported > > only once for each function it appears in > > fs/btrfs/super.c:417:25: error: label 'out' used but not defined > > 417 | goto out; > > | ^~~~ > > make[5]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:243: fs/btrfs/super.o] Error 1 > > > > Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Links: > > - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-master/build/next-20231128/testrun/21349057/suite/build/test/gcc-13-lkftconfig-kselftest/log > > > > - https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-next-master/build/next-20231128/testrun/21349057/suite/build/test/gcc-13-lkftconfig-kselftest/details/ > > - https://storage.tuxsuite.com/public/linaro/lkft/builds/2Ymoxor9n54ID51BFjRBS06YQ3U/ > > - https://storage.tuxsuite.com/public/linaro/lkft/builds/2Ymoxor9n54ID51BFjRBS06YQ3U/config > > > > Is it W=1 build? I can't reproduce on btrfs tree with > CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_POSIX_ACL=y and without W=1. My config did not set this # CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_POSIX_ACL is not set Do you think the system should auto select the above config as default when following config gets enabled ? CONFIG_BTRFS_FS=m (or) CONFIG_BTRFS_FS=y - Naresh > Thanks. > > -- > An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
