Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
On 9/18/19 3:03 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 07:05:53 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote...
>
>> * Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/17/19 6:38 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:52:42 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote...
> * Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
>> On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Changes since 20190915:
>>>
>>
>> on x86_64:
>>
>> when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
Hi Randy,
thanks for the report.
>> CC kernel/sched/core.o
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c: In function ‘uclamp_update_active_tasks’:
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: error: storage size of ‘it’ isn’t known
>> struct css_task_iter it;
>>^~
>> CC kernel/printk/printk_safe.o
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1084:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>> ‘css_task_iter_start’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_start’?
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> css_task_iter_start(css, 0, );
>> ^~~
>> __sg_page_iter_start
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1085:14: error: implicit declaration of function
>> ‘css_task_iter_next’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_next’?
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> while ((p = css_task_iter_next())) {
>> ^~
>> __sg_page_iter_next
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1091:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>> ‘css_task_iter_end’; did you mean ‘get_task_cred’?
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> css_task_iter_end();
>> ^
>> get_task_cred
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: warning: unused variable ‘it’
>> [-Wunused-variable]
>> struct css_task_iter it;
>>^~
>>
>
> I cannot reproduce this build failue: I took Linus's latest which has all
> the -next scheduler commits included (ad062195731b), and an x86-64 "make
> defconfig" and a disabling of CONFIG_CGROUPS still resuls in a kernel
> that builds fine.
Same here Ingo, I cannot reproduce on arm64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS and
testing on tip/sched/core.
However, if you like, the following patch can make that code a
bit more "robust".
Best,
Patrick
---8<---
From 7e17b7bb08dd8dfc57e01c2a7b6875439eb47cbe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Patrick Bellasi
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:12:10 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] sched/core: uclamp: Fix compile error on
!CONFIG_CGROUPS
Randy reported a compiler error on x86_64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS which is due
to uclamp_update_active_tasks() using the undefined css_task_iter().
Since uclamp_update_active_tasks() is used only when cgroup support is
enabled, fix that by properly guarding that function at compile time.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1898d3c9-1997-17ce-a022-a5e28c8dc...@infradead.org/
Fixes: commit babbe170e05 ("sched/uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's
clamp changes")
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap # build-tested
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> Build failures like this one shouldn't depend on the compiler version -
>> and it's still a mystery how and why this build bug triggered - we cannot
>> apply the fix without knowing the answer to those questions.
>
> Right, but it's also quite strange it's not triggering without the
> guarding above. The only definition of struct css_task_iter I can see is
> the one
> provided in:
>
>include/linux/cgroup.h:50
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/cgroup.h?h=35f7a95266153b1cf0caca3aa9661cb721864527#n50
>
> which is CONFIG_CGROUPS guarded.
>
>> Can you reproduce the build bug with Linus's latest tree? If not, which
>> part of -next triggers the build failure?
>
> I tried again using this morning's Linus tree headed at:
>
> commit 35f7a9526615 ("Merge tag 'devprop-5.4-rc1' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm")
>
> and compilation actually fails for me too.
and linux-next of 20190924 still fails also...
> Everything is fine in v5.3 with !CONFIG_CGROUPS and a git bisect
> between v5.3 and Linus master points to:
>
> commit babbe170e053c ("sched/uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's clamp
> changes")
>
> So, I think it's really my fault not properly testing !CONFIG_CGROUP,
> which is enforced by default from CONFIG_SCHED_AUTOGROUP.
>
> The patch above fixes the compilation error, hope this helps.
>
> Cheers,
> Patrick
--
~Randy
Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 07:05:53 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote...
> * Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
>> On 9/17/19 6:38 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:52:42 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote...
>> >
>> >> * Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Changes since 20190915:
>>
>> >>>
>> >>> on x86_64:
>> >>>
>> >>> when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
>> >
>> > Hi Randy,
>> > thanks for the report.
>> >
>> >>> CC kernel/sched/core.o
>> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c: In function ‘uclamp_update_active_tasks’:
>> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: error: storage size of ‘it’ isn’t known
>> >>> struct css_task_iter it;
>> >>>^~
>> >>> CC kernel/printk/printk_safe.o
>> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1084:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>> >>> ‘css_task_iter_start’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_start’?
>> >>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> >>> css_task_iter_start(css, 0, );
>> >>> ^~~
>> >>> __sg_page_iter_start
>> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1085:14: error: implicit declaration of function
>> >>> ‘css_task_iter_next’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_next’?
>> >>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> >>> while ((p = css_task_iter_next())) {
>> >>> ^~
>> >>> __sg_page_iter_next
>> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1091:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>> >>> ‘css_task_iter_end’; did you mean ‘get_task_cred’?
>> >>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> >>> css_task_iter_end();
>> >>> ^
>> >>> get_task_cred
>> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: warning: unused variable ‘it’
>> >>> [-Wunused-variable]
>> >>> struct css_task_iter it;
>> >>>^~
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> I cannot reproduce this build failue: I took Linus's latest which has all
>> >> the -next scheduler commits included (ad062195731b), and an x86-64 "make
>> >> defconfig" and a disabling of CONFIG_CGROUPS still resuls in a kernel
>> >> that builds fine.
>> >
>> > Same here Ingo, I cannot reproduce on arm64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS and
>> > testing on tip/sched/core.
>> >
>> > However, if you like, the following patch can make that code a
>> > bit more "robust".
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Patrick
>> >
>> > ---8<---
>> > From 7e17b7bb08dd8dfc57e01c2a7b6875439eb47cbe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> > From: Patrick Bellasi
>> > Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:12:10 +0100
>> > Subject: [PATCH 1/1] sched/core: uclamp: Fix compile error on
>> > !CONFIG_CGROUPS
>> >
>> > Randy reported a compiler error on x86_64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS which is due
>> > to uclamp_update_active_tasks() using the undefined css_task_iter().
>> >
>> > Since uclamp_update_active_tasks() is used only when cgroup support is
>> > enabled, fix that by properly guarding that function at compile time.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi
>> > Link:
>> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1898d3c9-1997-17ce-a022-a5e28c8dc...@infradead.org/
>> > Fixes: commit babbe170e05 ("sched/uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's
>> > clamp changes")
>>
>> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap # build-tested
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> Build failures like this one shouldn't depend on the compiler version -
> and it's still a mystery how and why this build bug triggered - we cannot
> apply the fix without knowing the answer to those questions.
Right, but it's also quite strange it's not triggering without the
guarding above. The only definition of struct css_task_iter I can see is
the one
provided in:
include/linux/cgroup.h:50
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/cgroup.h?h=35f7a95266153b1cf0caca3aa9661cb721864527#n50
which is CONFIG_CGROUPS guarded.
> Can you reproduce the build bug with Linus's latest tree? If not, which
> part of -next triggers the build failure?
I tried again using this morning's Linus tree headed at:
commit 35f7a9526615 ("Merge tag 'devprop-5.4-rc1' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm")
and compilation actually fails for me too.
Everything is fine in v5.3 with !CONFIG_CGROUPS and a git bisect
between v5.3 and Linus master points to:
commit babbe170e053c ("sched/uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's clamp
changes")
So, I think it's really my fault not properly testing !CONFIG_CGROUP,
which is enforced by default from CONFIG_SCHED_AUTOGROUP.
The patch above fixes the compilation error, hope this helps.
Cheers,
Patrick
--
#include
Patrick Bellasi
Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
* Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 9/17/19 6:38 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:52:42 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote...
> >
> >> * Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20190915:
>
> >>>
> >>> on x86_64:
> >>>
> >>> when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
> >
> > Hi Randy,
> > thanks for the report.
> >
> >>> CC kernel/sched/core.o
> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c: In function ‘uclamp_update_active_tasks’:
> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: error: storage size of ‘it’ isn’t known
> >>> struct css_task_iter it;
> >>>^~
> >>> CC kernel/printk/printk_safe.o
> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1084:2: error: implicit declaration of function
> >>> ‘css_task_iter_start’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_start’?
> >>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>> css_task_iter_start(css, 0, );
> >>> ^~~
> >>> __sg_page_iter_start
> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1085:14: error: implicit declaration of function
> >>> ‘css_task_iter_next’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_next’?
> >>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>> while ((p = css_task_iter_next())) {
> >>> ^~
> >>> __sg_page_iter_next
> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1091:2: error: implicit declaration of function
> >>> ‘css_task_iter_end’; did you mean ‘get_task_cred’?
> >>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >>> css_task_iter_end();
> >>> ^
> >>> get_task_cred
> >>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: warning: unused variable ‘it’
> >>> [-Wunused-variable]
> >>> struct css_task_iter it;
> >>>^~
> >>>
> >>
> >> I cannot reproduce this build failue: I took Linus's latest which has all
> >> the -next scheduler commits included (ad062195731b), and an x86-64 "make
> >> defconfig" and a disabling of CONFIG_CGROUPS still resuls in a kernel
> >> that builds fine.
> >
> > Same here Ingo, I cannot reproduce on arm64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS and
> > testing on tip/sched/core.
> >
> > However, if you like, the following patch can make that code a
> > bit more "robust".
> >
> > Best,
> > Patrick
> >
> > ---8<---
> > From 7e17b7bb08dd8dfc57e01c2a7b6875439eb47cbe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Patrick Bellasi
> > Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:12:10 +0100
> > Subject: [PATCH 1/1] sched/core: uclamp: Fix compile error on
> > !CONFIG_CGROUPS
> >
> > Randy reported a compiler error on x86_64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS which is due
> > to uclamp_update_active_tasks() using the undefined css_task_iter().
> >
> > Since uclamp_update_active_tasks() is used only when cgroup support is
> > enabled, fix that by properly guarding that function at compile time.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi
> > Link:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1898d3c9-1997-17ce-a022-a5e28c8dc...@infradead.org/
> > Fixes: commit babbe170e05 ("sched/uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's
> > clamp changes")
>
> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap # build-tested
>
> Thanks.
Build failures like this one shouldn't depend on the compiler version -
and it's still a mystery how and why this build bug triggered - we cannot
apply the fix without knowing the answer to those questions.
Can you reproduce the build bug with Linus's latest tree? If not, which
part of -next triggers the build failure?
Thanks,
Ingo
Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
On 9/17/19 6:38 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:52:42 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote...
>
>> * Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
Hi all,
Changes since 20190915:
>>>
>>> on x86_64:
>>>
>>> when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
>
> Hi Randy,
> thanks for the report.
>
>>> CC kernel/sched/core.o
>>> ../kernel/sched/core.c: In function ‘uclamp_update_active_tasks’:
>>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: error: storage size of ‘it’ isn’t known
>>> struct css_task_iter it;
>>>^~
>>> CC kernel/printk/printk_safe.o
>>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1084:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>>> ‘css_task_iter_start’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_start’?
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> css_task_iter_start(css, 0, );
>>> ^~~
>>> __sg_page_iter_start
>>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1085:14: error: implicit declaration of function
>>> ‘css_task_iter_next’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_next’?
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> while ((p = css_task_iter_next())) {
>>> ^~
>>> __sg_page_iter_next
>>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1091:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>>> ‘css_task_iter_end’; did you mean ‘get_task_cred’?
>>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>> css_task_iter_end();
>>> ^
>>> get_task_cred
>>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: warning: unused variable ‘it’
>>> [-Wunused-variable]
>>> struct css_task_iter it;
>>>^~
>>>
>>
>> I cannot reproduce this build failue: I took Linus's latest which has all
>> the -next scheduler commits included (ad062195731b), and an x86-64 "make
>> defconfig" and a disabling of CONFIG_CGROUPS still resuls in a kernel
>> that builds fine.
>
> Same here Ingo, I cannot reproduce on arm64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS and
> testing on tip/sched/core.
>
> However, if you like, the following patch can make that code a
> bit more "robust".
>
> Best,
> Patrick
>
> ---8<---
> From 7e17b7bb08dd8dfc57e01c2a7b6875439eb47cbe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Patrick Bellasi
> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:12:10 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] sched/core: uclamp: Fix compile error on !CONFIG_CGROUPS
>
> Randy reported a compiler error on x86_64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS which is due
> to uclamp_update_active_tasks() using the undefined css_task_iter().
>
> Since uclamp_update_active_tasks() is used only when cgroup support is
> enabled, fix that by properly guarding that function at compile time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi
> Link:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1898d3c9-1997-17ce-a022-a5e28c8dc...@infradead.org/
> Fixes: commit babbe170e05 ("sched/uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's clamp
> changes")
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap # build-tested
Thanks.
> ---
> kernel/sched/core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 3c7b90bcbe4e..14873ad4b34a 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -1043,6 +1043,7 @@ static inline void uclamp_rq_dec(struct rq *rq, struct
> task_struct *p)
> uclamp_rq_dec_id(rq, p, clamp_id);
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK_GROUP
> static inline void
> uclamp_update_active(struct task_struct *p, enum uclamp_id clamp_id)
> {
> @@ -1091,7 +1092,6 @@ uclamp_update_active_tasks(struct cgroup_subsys_state
> *css,
> css_task_iter_end();
> }
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK_GROUP
> static void cpu_util_update_eff(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css);
> static void uclamp_update_root_tg(void)
> {
>
--
~Randy
Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
On 9/17/19 6:50 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 14:38:28 +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote... > >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:52:42 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote... >> >>> * Randy Dunlap wrote: >>> On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20190915: > on x86_64: when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set: >> >> Hi Randy, >> thanks for the report. > > Out of curiosity, which compiler version are you using? > > I'm on: > > aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc (GNU Toolchain for the A-profile Architecture > 8.3-2019.03 (arm-rel-8.36)) 8.3.0 > > Cheers, > Patrick > gcc --version gcc (SUSE Linux) 7.4.1 20190424 [gcc-7-branch revision 270538] -- ~Randy
Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 08:52:42 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote...
> * Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
>> On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Changes since 20190915:
>> >
>>
>> on x86_64:
>>
>> when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
Hi Randy,
thanks for the report.
>> CC kernel/sched/core.o
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c: In function ‘uclamp_update_active_tasks’:
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: error: storage size of ‘it’ isn’t known
>> struct css_task_iter it;
>>^~
>> CC kernel/printk/printk_safe.o
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1084:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>> ‘css_task_iter_start’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_start’?
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> css_task_iter_start(css, 0, );
>> ^~~
>> __sg_page_iter_start
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1085:14: error: implicit declaration of function
>> ‘css_task_iter_next’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_next’?
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> while ((p = css_task_iter_next())) {
>> ^~
>> __sg_page_iter_next
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1091:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>> ‘css_task_iter_end’; did you mean ‘get_task_cred’?
>> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> css_task_iter_end();
>> ^
>> get_task_cred
>> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: warning: unused variable ‘it’
>> [-Wunused-variable]
>> struct css_task_iter it;
>>^~
>>
>
> I cannot reproduce this build failue: I took Linus's latest which has all
> the -next scheduler commits included (ad062195731b), and an x86-64 "make
> defconfig" and a disabling of CONFIG_CGROUPS still resuls in a kernel
> that builds fine.
Same here Ingo, I cannot reproduce on arm64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS and
testing on tip/sched/core.
However, if you like, the following patch can make that code a
bit more "robust".
Best,
Patrick
---8<---
>From 7e17b7bb08dd8dfc57e01c2a7b6875439eb47cbe Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Patrick Bellasi
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:12:10 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] sched/core: uclamp: Fix compile error on !CONFIG_CGROUPS
Randy reported a compiler error on x86_64 and !CONFIG_CGROUPS which is due
to uclamp_update_active_tasks() using the undefined css_task_iter().
Since uclamp_update_active_tasks() is used only when cgroup support is
enabled, fix that by properly guarding that function at compile time.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Bellasi
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1898d3c9-1997-17ce-a022-a5e28c8dc...@infradead.org/
Fixes: commit babbe170e05 ("sched/uclamp: Update CPU's refcount on TG's clamp
changes")
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 3c7b90bcbe4e..14873ad4b34a 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -1043,6 +1043,7 @@ static inline void uclamp_rq_dec(struct rq *rq, struct
task_struct *p)
uclamp_rq_dec_id(rq, p, clamp_id);
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK_GROUP
static inline void
uclamp_update_active(struct task_struct *p, enum uclamp_id clamp_id)
{
@@ -1091,7 +1092,6 @@ uclamp_update_active_tasks(struct cgroup_subsys_state
*css,
css_task_iter_end();
}
-#ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK_GROUP
static void cpu_util_update_eff(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css);
static void uclamp_update_root_tg(void)
{
--
2.22.0
---8<---
--
#include
Patrick Bellasi
Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
* Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20190915:
> >
>
> on x86_64:
>
> when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
>
> CC kernel/sched/core.o
> ../kernel/sched/core.c: In function ‘uclamp_update_active_tasks’:
> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: error: storage size of ‘it’ isn’t known
> struct css_task_iter it;
>^~
> CC kernel/printk/printk_safe.o
> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1084:2: error: implicit declaration of function
> ‘css_task_iter_start’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_start’?
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> css_task_iter_start(css, 0, );
> ^~~
> __sg_page_iter_start
> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1085:14: error: implicit declaration of function
> ‘css_task_iter_next’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_next’?
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> while ((p = css_task_iter_next())) {
> ^~
> __sg_page_iter_next
> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1091:2: error: implicit declaration of function
> ‘css_task_iter_end’; did you mean ‘get_task_cred’?
> [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> css_task_iter_end();
> ^
> get_task_cred
> ../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: warning: unused variable ‘it’
> [-Wunused-variable]
> struct css_task_iter it;
>^~
>
I cannot reproduce this build failue: I took Linus's latest which has all
the -next scheduler commits included (ad062195731b), and an x86-64 "make
defconfig" and a disabling of CONFIG_CGROUPS still resuls in a kernel
that builds fine.
Thanks,
Ingo
Re: linux-next: Tree for Sep 16 (kernel/sched/core.c)
On 9/16/19 3:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Changes since 20190915:
>
on x86_64:
when CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set:
CC kernel/sched/core.o
../kernel/sched/core.c: In function ‘uclamp_update_active_tasks’:
../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: error: storage size of ‘it’ isn’t known
struct css_task_iter it;
^~
CC kernel/printk/printk_safe.o
../kernel/sched/core.c:1084:2: error: implicit declaration of function
‘css_task_iter_start’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_start’?
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
css_task_iter_start(css, 0, );
^~~
__sg_page_iter_start
../kernel/sched/core.c:1085:14: error: implicit declaration of function
‘css_task_iter_next’; did you mean ‘__sg_page_iter_next’?
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
while ((p = css_task_iter_next())) {
^~
__sg_page_iter_next
../kernel/sched/core.c:1091:2: error: implicit declaration of function
‘css_task_iter_end’; did you mean ‘get_task_cred’?
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
css_task_iter_end();
^
get_task_cred
../kernel/sched/core.c:1081:23: warning: unused variable ‘it’
[-Wunused-variable]
struct css_task_iter it;
^~
--
~Randy
