Hi Paul,

1.

the issue is about where the function define: raw_write_seqcount_t_begin?

the update from v5.10.197 to v5.10.198 recently, it remove the function define in:

commit a8dd21118b0fa33efd09b713cef79d02e72719e2
Author: Ahmed S. Darwish <a.darw...@linutronix.de>
Date:   Sun Dec 6 17:21:42 2020 +0100
    seqlock: Prefix internal seqcount_t-only macros with a "do_"

-static inline void raw_write_seqcount_t_begin(seqcount_t *s)
+static inline void do_raw_write_seqcount_begin(seqcount_t *s)
 {
        kcsan_nestable_atomic_begin();
        s->sequence++;

2.

it should change raw_write_seqcount_t_begin to do_raw_write_seqcount_begin
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rt/linux-stable-rt.git/tree/include/net/sch_generic.h?h=v5.10-rt-next

static inline bool qdisc_run_begin(struct Qdisc *qdisc)
{
...
#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
        do_raw_write_seqcount_begin(s);
...
}

Thank for your careful to correct the potential issue.

I will send V2.

LiWang.

On 10/23/2023 22:15, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
[[linux-yocto][v5.10/standard/preempt-rt/base][PATCH] fix linux-yocto-rt 
compile error] On 22/10/2023 (Sun 19:21) Li Wang via lists.yoctoproject.org 
wrote:

kernel-source/include/net/sch_generic.h:198:17: error: implicit
declaration of function 'raw_write_seqcount_t_begin'; did you mean
'raw_write_seqcount_begin'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
Your commit seems reasonable, but it is missing one simple step.

Running "git blame" on the unpatched file, which leads to:

It isn't so much about the "blame" -- but knowing where the issure
originated from, so we can direct it to other development streams if
appropriate.

So in doing so I see afe3f03a84d51:

  -----------------
commit afe3f03a84d5119b8a8af700e8360e4e4e2dc33c
Author:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bige...@linutronix.de>
AuthorDate: Tue Sep 8 16:57:11 2020 +0200
Commit:     Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com>
CommitDate: Thu Dec 17 12:35:26 2020 -0500

     net: Properly annotate the try-lock for the seqlock
  -----------------

So now we have more questions.

This is an old commit from 2020.  Why is it showing up as compile
breakage today?

Does the commit added to v5.10-yocto match the original in the
linux-stable-rt repo, or did Bruce do a compile tweak for it on the fly
back 3y ago and now upstream fixed the function name to not look like a
typedef?

Are we going to encounter the same issue on v5.15 in another 24 hours?

Your job as submitter is not just to provide the "raw" fix to Bruce, but
to ALSO provide the "how did we get here" story so he has a better idea
of the scope of impact and can perhaps better react in the future by
knowing what happened here so it can be prevented next time.

Thanks,
Paul.
--

Signed-off-by: Li Wang <li.w...@windriver.com>
---
  include/net/sch_generic.h | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/net/sch_generic.h b/include/net/sch_generic.h
index 72be68652bb8..4574dd262efd 100644
--- a/include/net/sch_generic.h
+++ b/include/net/sch_generic.h
@@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ static inline bool qdisc_run_begin(struct Qdisc *qdisc)
                 * Variant of write_seqcount_t_begin() telling lockdep that a
                 * trylock was attempted.
                 */
-               raw_write_seqcount_t_begin(s);
+               raw_write_seqcount_begin(s);
                seqcount_acquire(&s->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_);
                return true;
        }
--
2.25.1



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#13240): 
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/linux-yocto/message/13240
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/102114616/21656
Group Owner: linux-yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/linux-yocto/unsub 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to