| Message ID | 150445955491.4453.8477796864040491127.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Sun 03-09-17 10:25:55, Dan Williams wrote: > The 0day kbuild robot reports: > > >> drivers//dax/super.c:64:20: error: redefinition of 'fs_dax_get_by_bdev' > struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > In file included from drivers//dax/super.c:22:0: > include/linux/dax.h:76:34: note: previous definition of 'fs_dax_get_by_bdev' was here > static inline struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Protect the definition of fs_dax_get_by_bdev() in drivers/dax/super.c > with an ifdef. > > Fixes: 78f354735081 ("dax: introduce a fs_dax_get_by_bdev() helper") > Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > Cc: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> > Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> OK, or you could have both !DAX and DAX implementations in include/linux/dax.h as inline together? It would look a bit more logical to me. But I don't care much. So Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Honza > --- > drivers/dax/super.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/dax/super.c b/drivers/dax/super.c > index b699aac268a6..3600ff786646 100644 > --- a/drivers/dax/super.c > +++ b/drivers/dax/super.c > @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ int bdev_dax_pgoff(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector, size_t size, > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(bdev_dax_pgoff); > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FS_DAX) > struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) > { > if (!blk_queue_dax(bdev->bd_queue)) > @@ -68,6 +69,7 @@ struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) > return fs_dax_get_by_host(bdev->bd_disk->disk_name); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fs_dax_get_by_bdev); > +#endif > > /** > * __bdev_dax_supported() - Check if the device supports dax for filesystem >
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote: > On Sun 03-09-17 10:25:55, Dan Williams wrote: >> The 0day kbuild robot reports: >> >> >> drivers//dax/super.c:64:20: error: redefinition of 'fs_dax_get_by_bdev' >> struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> In file included from drivers//dax/super.c:22:0: >> include/linux/dax.h:76:34: note: previous definition of 'fs_dax_get_by_bdev' was here >> static inline struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> Protect the definition of fs_dax_get_by_bdev() in drivers/dax/super.c >> with an ifdef. >> >> Fixes: 78f354735081 ("dax: introduce a fs_dax_get_by_bdev() helper") >> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> >> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> >> Cc: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> >> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> > > OK, or you could have both !DAX and DAX implementations in > include/linux/dax.h as inline together? It would look a bit more logical to > me. But I don't care much. So > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> My motivation for not doing that is to avoid including blkdev.h from dax.h.
On Mon 04-09-17 08:55:33, Dan Williams wrote: > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote: > > On Sun 03-09-17 10:25:55, Dan Williams wrote: > >> The 0day kbuild robot reports: > >> > >> >> drivers//dax/super.c:64:20: error: redefinition of 'fs_dax_get_by_bdev' > >> struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) > >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> In file included from drivers//dax/super.c:22:0: > >> include/linux/dax.h:76:34: note: previous definition of 'fs_dax_get_by_bdev' was here > >> static inline struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) > >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> > >> Protect the definition of fs_dax_get_by_bdev() in drivers/dax/super.c > >> with an ifdef. > >> > >> Fixes: 78f354735081 ("dax: introduce a fs_dax_get_by_bdev() helper") > >> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> > >> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> > >> Cc: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> > >> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> > > > > OK, or you could have both !DAX and DAX implementations in > > include/linux/dax.h as inline together? It would look a bit more logical to > > me. But I don't care much. So > > > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> > > My motivation for not doing that is to avoid including blkdev.h from dax.h. OK, makes sense. Honza
diff --git a/drivers/dax/super.c b/drivers/dax/super.c index b699aac268a6..3600ff786646 100644 --- a/drivers/dax/super.c +++ b/drivers/dax/super.c @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ int bdev_dax_pgoff(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t sector, size_t size, } EXPORT_SYMBOL(bdev_dax_pgoff); +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FS_DAX) struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) { if (!blk_queue_dax(bdev->bd_queue)) @@ -68,6 +69,7 @@ struct dax_device *fs_dax_get_by_bdev(struct block_device *bdev) return fs_dax_get_by_host(bdev->bd_disk->disk_name); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fs_dax_get_by_bdev); +#endif /** * __bdev_dax_supported() - Check if the device supports dax for filesystem