On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 08:54:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jall,
> 
> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (s390x
> s390-defconfig) failed like this:
> 
> drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c:293:10: error: 'BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY' undeclared 
> (first use in this function)
> drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c:327:9: error: 'BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_OK' undeclared 
> (first use in this function)
> 
> Caused by commit
> 
>   fc17b6534eb8 ("blk-mq: switch ->queue_rq return value to blk_status_t")
> 
> interacting with commit
> 
>   12d907626539 ("s390/scm: convert to blk-mq")
> 
> from the s390 tree.
> 
> Is the following the correct merge fixup?
> 

The failure made int into Linus' tree, but the fix didn't. Is the fix pending
in some other queue or does it have to be (re-)submitted ?

Guenter

> From: Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:51:32 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] s390: fix up for "blk-mq: switch ->queue_rq return value to
>  blk_status_t"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
> ---
>  drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c
> index 42018a20f2b7..2cd6123c8f18 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/block/scm_blk.c
> @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>       spin_lock(&sq->lock);
>       if (!scm_permit_request(bdev, req)) {
>               spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -             return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY;
> +             return BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
>       }
>  
>       scmrq = sq->scmrq;
> @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>               if (!scmrq) {
>                       SCM_LOG(5, "no request");
>                       spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -                     return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY;
> +                     return BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
>               }
>               scm_request_init(bdev, scmrq);
>               sq->scmrq = scmrq;
> @@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>  
>               sq->scmrq = NULL;
>               spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -             return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY;
> +             return BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
>       }
>       blk_mq_start_request(req);
>  
> @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int scm_blk_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>               sq->scmrq = NULL;
>       }
>       spin_unlock(&sq->lock);
> -     return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_OK;
> +     return BLK_STS_OK;
>  }
>  
>  static int scm_blk_init_hctx(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, void *data,

Reply via email to