On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:02:17PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:30:57AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:42:42PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote: > > > tree: git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/xfs for-next > > > head: 1813dd64057490e7a0678a885c4fe6d02f78bdc1 > > > commit: 612cfbfe174a89d565363fff7f3961a2dda5fb71 [68/70] xfs: add pre-write metadata buffer verifier callbacks > > > > > > > > > sparse warnings: > > > > > > + fs/xfs/xfs_ialloc_btree.c:186:1: sparse: symbol 'xfs_inobt_verify' was not declared. Should it be static? > > > fs/xfs/xfs_ialloc_btree.c:227:1: sparse: symbol 'xfs_inobt_read_verify' was not declared. Should it be static? .... > > > > These are debug build only, and intended to be globally visible so > > they can be changed with a debugger. And sparse didn't warn about > > them, because you didn't do a debug build, so the script shouldn't > > be changing them.(*) > > > > Cheers, > > > > Dave. > > > > (*) Please don't do debug XFS builds with this automated checker. We > > pretty much turn all static functions to global "noinline" functions > > for debug builds, and sparse will throw hundreds of useless warnings. > > Dave, thanks for the explanations. And sorry for the noises! > I'll disable the "Should it be static" checks against the xfs tree. I didn't say that - I'm suggesting that you should be more selective about what the bot throws out as a fix. i.e. only fix the newly discovered problem rather than everything that is found.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
