Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the xarray tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:09:20 -0700 Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 09:50:33AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 8:27 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:  
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > After merging the xarray tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:  
> [...]
> > > from the nvdimm tree.
> > >
> > > Willy thanks for the heads up about this.
> > >
> > > I have applied the following merge fix patch (taken from the diff between
> > > the -next tree at this point and the xarray-20180615 branch from the
> > > xarray tree) for today.  
> > 
> > I was hoping that dax_lock_page() and the memory_failure() handling
> > could go in before the xarray rework. This helps -stable and distros
> > that need to backport this error handling support. Willy, would you be
> > amenable to rebasing on top of the next rev of the
> > dax+memory_failure() work?
> > 
> > Apologies for the thrash.  
> 
> I am absolutely amenable to rebasing.  The only problem is that I'm
> in Tokyo for the next two weeks.  I can put some work in on this, but
> coordination may be a little off.  If somebody else wants to do the work,
> the only (serious) difference between the xarray-20180615 and xarray
> branches in my repo is that the former is based on the dax_lock_page()
> changes having gone in.
> 
> The differences sum up to:
> 
> +@@ -414,8 +413,7 @@ struct page *dax_lock_page(unsigned long pfn)
> + 
> +               entry = __radix_tree_lookup(&mapping->i_pages, index, NULL,
> +                               &slot);
> +-              if (!entry ||
> +-                  WARN_ON_ONCE(!radix_tree_exceptional_entry(entry))) {
> ++              if (!entry || WARN_ON_ONCE(!xa_is_value(entry))) {
> +                       xa_unlock_irq(&mapping->i_pages);
> +                       break;
> +               } else if (!slot_locked(mapping, slot)) {
> 
> (in "xarray: Replace exceptional entries")
> 
> then dax_entry_waitqueue() changing its argument in "dax: Hash on XArray instead of mapping".
> 
> and finally the patch converting dax_lock_page() and dax_unlock_page().
> 
> I really wanted to keep the thrash here to a minimum, but this is the
> best I could come up with in terms of minimising conflicts :-(

This has all gone away today as the conflicting commits have been
removed from the nvdimm tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgpNz8u8jvO5N.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature