Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 May 2014 07:36:34 +1000 | From | Stephen Rothwell <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the akpm tree |
| |
Hi,
On Mon, 19 May 2014 08:13:16 -0700 Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-05-19 at 18:13 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > > > After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (arm > > multi_v7_defconfig) produced these warnings: > > > > > > ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: excess elements in struct initializer [enabled by default] > > ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: (near initialization for 'ipcns_chain.rwsem') [enabled by default] > > ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: excess elements in struct initializer [enabled by default] > > ipc/ipcns_notifier.c:22:8: warning: (near initialization for 'ipcns_chain.rwsem') [enabled by default] > > > > and many more in other files ... > > Hmm are all the warning the same? Is this just on arm? have you seen it > in other archs? (Could you please send me the .config)
The warnings were all the same, I saw it only on arm (since that was what I built) and I mentioned the config above.
> > Presumably a result of commit fe2038c57c03 ("rwsem: Support optimistic > > spinning"). > > If CONFIG_SMP, we add two new fields to the rwsem structure > (include/linux/rwsem.h) and likewise we update the > __RWSEM_INITIALIZER(name) macro. Afaict the only way to trigger > something like that is to be using the spinlock variant > (rwsem-spinlock.h).
Actually quite a few architectures do set CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK, and so wouldn't it make more sense to actually directly test that?
> The fix for that would be: > > diff --git a/include/linux/rwsem.h b/include/linux/rwsem.h > index 3e108f1..091d993 100644 > --- a/include/linux/rwsem.h > +++ b/include/linux/rwsem.h > @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ static inline int rwsem_is_locked(struct rw_semaphore *sem) > # define __RWSEM_DEP_MAP_INIT(lockname) > #endif > > -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && defined(CONFIG_RWSEM_XCHGADD_ALGORITHM)
so
#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && !defined(CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK)
?
> This was picked up today by -tip maintainers, so I guess it should also > be removed from -mm.
Was a fix also picked up?
-- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |