| Message ID | 20230804102648.78683-1-hch@infradead.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | romfs: only select BUFFER_HEAD for the block based path | expand |
Sorry, this should be: From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> to match the signoff. I managed to mess my mail setup, but it should be fixed now. On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 12:26:48PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > selecting BUFFER_HEAD unconditionally does not work as romfs can also > be built with only the MTD backend and thus without CONFIG_BLOCK. > > Fixes: 0f842210d97a ("fs/Kconfig: Fix compile error for romfs") > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > --- > fs/romfs/Kconfig | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/romfs/Kconfig b/fs/romfs/Kconfig > index 3f6b550eee6192..f24a96a331af1b 100644 > --- a/fs/romfs/Kconfig > +++ b/fs/romfs/Kconfig > @@ -2,7 +2,6 @@ > config ROMFS_FS > tristate "ROM file system support" > depends on BLOCK || MTD > - select BUFFER_HEAD > help > This is a very small read-only file system mainly intended for > initial ram disks of installation disks, but it could be used for > @@ -58,6 +57,7 @@ endchoice > config ROMFS_ON_BLOCK > bool > default y if ROMFS_BACKED_BY_BLOCK || ROMFS_BACKED_BY_BOTH > + select BUFFER_HEAD > > config ROMFS_ON_MTD > bool > -- > 2.39.2 ---end quoted text---
Hi Christoph, On 2023/8/4 18:26, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > selecting BUFFER_HEAD unconditionally does not work as romfs can also > be built with only the MTD backend and thus without CONFIG_BLOCK. > > Fixes: 0f842210d97a ("fs/Kconfig: Fix compile error for romfs") > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > --- > fs/romfs/Kconfig | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/romfs/Kconfig b/fs/romfs/Kconfig > index 3f6b550eee6192..f24a96a331af1b 100644 > --- a/fs/romfs/Kconfig > +++ b/fs/romfs/Kconfig > @@ -2,7 +2,6 @@ > config ROMFS_FS > tristate "ROM file system support" > depends on BLOCK || MTD > - select BUFFER_HEAD > help > This is a very small read-only file system mainly intended for > initial ram disks of installation disks, but it could be used for > @@ -58,6 +57,7 @@ endchoice > config ROMFS_ON_BLOCK > bool > default y if ROMFS_BACKED_BY_BLOCK || ROMFS_BACKED_BY_BOTH > + select BUFFER_HEAD > > config ROMFS_ON_MTD > bool I have tested the patch on my environment and it resolves the two compile errors reported by kernel test robot. The links are as follows: Link1: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202308031810.pQzGmR1v-lkp@intel.com/ Link2: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202308041329.6SK97Asr-lkp@intel.com/ Tested-by: Li Zetao <lizetao1@huawei.com> Thanks, Li Zetao
On 8/4/23 4:26?AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > selecting BUFFER_HEAD unconditionally does not work as romfs can also > be built with only the MTD backend and thus without CONFIG_BLOCK. I folded this in with the other one and made a note about that.
diff --git a/fs/romfs/Kconfig b/fs/romfs/Kconfig index 3f6b550eee6192..f24a96a331af1b 100644 --- a/fs/romfs/Kconfig +++ b/fs/romfs/Kconfig @@ -2,7 +2,6 @@ config ROMFS_FS tristate "ROM file system support" depends on BLOCK || MTD - select BUFFER_HEAD help This is a very small read-only file system mainly intended for initial ram disks of installation disks, but it could be used for @@ -58,6 +57,7 @@ endchoice config ROMFS_ON_BLOCK bool default y if ROMFS_BACKED_BY_BLOCK || ROMFS_BACKED_BY_BOTH + select BUFFER_HEAD config ROMFS_ON_MTD bool
selecting BUFFER_HEAD unconditionally does not work as romfs can also be built with only the MTD backend and thus without CONFIG_BLOCK. Fixes: 0f842210d97a ("fs/Kconfig: Fix compile error for romfs") Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> --- fs/romfs/Kconfig | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)