Re: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'

[Bryan Schumaker <bjschuma@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/31/2012 09:33 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 09:30 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>> On 07/31/2012 09:05 AM, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>> On 07/31/2012 08:55 AM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 08:47 -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>>>>> On 07/30/2012 11:14 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
>>>>>> Bryan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why did you switch to using IS_ENABLED in the first place, and why wasn't that put in a separate patch?
>>>>>
>>>>> IS_ENABLED() will check for CONFIG_NFS_V*_MODULE, last I checked the defined() macro doesn't.  Putting this into a separate patch makes the change non-bisectable since gcc will be checking against CONFIG_NFS_V3 but CONFIG_NFS_V3_MODULE is set.  Should I have changed the CONFIG_ variables instead of using IS_ENABLED()?
>>>>
>>>> Why is it evaluating differently in the include file vs. the .c file?
>>>> Are we missing an include in nfs_fs.h?
>>>
>>> Good question.  I don't see any reason that it would evaluate differently, but I'm compiling the .config attached to the initial email to try to figure it out.
>>>
>>
>> Looks like the IS_ENABLED() switch got pushed to the next patch for V3 in include/linux/nfs_fs.h.  Want me to resend the patches?  I took another look at how IS_ENABLED() is defined, and it'll work if I do the switch in the patch before I turn everything into separate modules if you want me to resend everything.
> 
> Please just make it incremental to the patch series that is already
> merged in today's nfs-for-3.6.

Easy enough, the patch that fixes it is the last one in the series that I sent in yesterday.

> 
> Cheers
>   Trond
> 
>>> - Bryan
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Fengguang Wu [mailto:fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:43 PM
>>>>>>> To: Schumaker, Bryan
>>>>>>> Cc: kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Myklebust, Trond; linux-
>>>>>>> nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>> Subject: [nfs:devel 46/51] fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of
>>>>>>> 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Bryan,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kernel build failed on
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tree:   git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/trondmy/linux-nfs.git devel
>>>>>>> head:   5c13c9e1c15ee2ca9ab2b953224001af53d9be09
>>>>>>> commit: 1c606fb74c758beafd98cbad9a9133eadeec2371 [46/51] NFS: Convert
>>>>>>> v3 into a module
>>>>>>> config: blackfin-BF533-EZKIT_defconfig (attached as .config)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All related error/warning messages:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fs/nfs/write.c:1592:5: error: redefinition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>> In file included from fs/nfs/write.c:19:0:
>>>>>>> include/linux/nfs_fs.h:547:1: note: previous definition of 'nfs_commit_inode'
>>>>>>> was here
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> vim +1592 fs/nfs/write.c
>>>>>>>   1589		return status;
>>>>>>>   1590	}
>>>>>>>   1591
>>>>>>>> 1592	int nfs_commit_inode(struct inode *inode, int how)
>>>>>>>   1593	{
>>>>>>>   1594		LIST_HEAD(head);
>>>>>>>   1595		struct nfs_commit_info cinfo;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> 0-DAY kernel build testing backend         Open Source Technology Centre
>>>>>>> Fengguang Wu <wfg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>                     Intel Corporation
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html