Re: [PATCH v2] SUNRPC: Add missing definition of ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE

[Chuck Lever]

> On Jun 15, 2020, at 2:25 AM, Christophe Leroy  
> wrote:
> 
> Even if that's only a warning, not including asm/cacheflush.h
> leads to svc_flush_bvec() being empty allthough powerpc defines
> ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE.
> 
>  CC  net/sunrpc/svcsock.o
> net/sunrpc/svcsock.c:227:5: warning: "ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE" is 
> not defined [-Wundef]
> #if ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE
> ^
> 
> Include linux/highmem.h so that asm/cacheflush.h will be included.
> 
> Reported-by: Christophe Leroy 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot 
> Cc: Chuck Lever 
> Fixes: ca07eda33e01 ("SUNRPC: Refactor svc_recvfrom()")
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy 

LGTM.

Acked-by: Chuck Lever 


> ---
> v2: Use linux/highmem.h instead of asm/cacheflush.sh
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy 
> ---
> net/sunrpc/svcsock.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> index 5c4ec9386f81..c537272f9c7e 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> +#include 
> #include 
> 
> #include 
> -- 
> 2.25.0
> 

--
Chuck Lever

Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: Add missing asm/cacheflush.h

[Chuck Lever]

Hi Christophe -

> On Jun 14, 2020, at 1:07 PM, Christophe Leroy  
> wrote:
> 
> Even if that's only a warning, not including asm/cacheflush.h
> leads to svc_flush_bvec() being empty allthough powerpc defines
> ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE.
> 
>  CC  net/sunrpc/svcsock.o
> net/sunrpc/svcsock.c:227:5: warning: "ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE" is 
> not defined [-Wundef]
> #if ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_FLUSH_DCACHE_PAGE
> ^
> 
> Fixes: ca07eda33e01 ("SUNRPC: Refactor svc_recvfrom()")
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy 
> ---
> I detected this on linux-next on June 4th and warned Chuck. Seems like it 
> went into mainline anyway.

Thanks for your patch. I've searched my mailbox. It appears I never
received your June 4th e-mail.

Does your patch also address:

   https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel=159194369128024=2 ?

If so, then

   Reported-by: kernel test robot 

should be added to the patch description.

Ideally, compilation on x86_64 should have thrown the same warning,
but it didn't. Why would the x86_64 build behave differently than
ppc64 or i386?


> net/sunrpc/svcsock.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> index 5c4ec9386f81..d9e99cb09aab 100644
> --- a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
> #include 
> #include 
> #include 
> +#include 

Nit: Let's include  in net/sunrpc/svcsock.h instead
of  directly.


> #include 
> #include 
> -- 
> 2.25.0
> 

--
Chuck Lever