On Fri, 05 Nov 2021, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au wrote:
Hi all,
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 19:42:23 +1100 Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 20:26:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au wrote:
After merging the drm-misc tree, today's linux-next build (arm multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c:111:29: error: conflicting types for '__stack_depot_save' 111 | static depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(void) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In file included from include/linux/page_ext.h:7, from include/linux/mm.h:25, from include/linux/kallsyms.h:13, from include/linux/bpf.h:20, from include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h:5, from include/linux/cgroup-defs.h:22, from include/linux/cgroup.h:28, from include/linux/memcontrol.h:13, from include/linux/swap.h:9, from include/linux/suspend.h:5, from include/linux/regulator/consumer.h:35, from include/linux/i2c.h:18, from include/drm/drm_crtc.h:28, from include/drm/drm_atomic.h:31, from drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c:24: include/linux/stackdepot.h:18:22: note: previous declaration of '__stack_depot_save' was here 18 | depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(unsigned long *entries, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Caused by commit
cd06ab2fd48f ("drm/locking: add backtrace for locking contended locks without backoff")
This may only have been revealed because of another fix I have had to apply today.
I have applied the following patch for today.
From: Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 20:17:52 +1100 Subject: [PATCH] drm/locking: fix for name conflict
Fixes: cd06ab2fd48f ("drm/locking: add backtrace for locking contended locks without backoff") Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c index 4d32b61fa1fd..ee36dd20900d 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_modeset_lock.c @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ static DEFINE_WW_CLASS(crtc_ww_class);
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_DEBUG_MODESET_LOCK) -static noinline depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(void) +static noinline depot_stack_handle_t __drm_stack_depot_save(void) { unsigned long entries[8]; unsigned int n; @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static void __stack_depot_print(depot_stack_handle_t stack_depot) kfree(buf); } #else /* CONFIG_DRM_DEBUG_MODESET_LOCK */ -static depot_stack_handle_t __stack_depot_save(void) +static depot_stack_handle_t __drm_stack_depot_save(void) { return 0; } @@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static inline int modeset_lock(struct drm_modeset_lock *lock, ret = 0; } else if (ret == -EDEADLK) { ctx->contended = lock;
ctx->stack_depot = __stack_depot_save();
ctx->stack_depot = __drm_stack_depot_save();}
return ret;
This has reappeared today. I don't know what happened to the drm-misc tree over the weeked :-(
I have reapplied the above fix.
So the above drm-misc commit is now in the drm tree, but its fix up commit vanished from the drm-misc tree over the past weekend :-(
Cc: drm-misc maintainers.
We normally point drm-misc/for-linux-next at drm-misc-next, *except* to drm-misc-next-fixes during the merge window. This is because drm-misc-next already starts accumulating stuff that's headed to one release later, e.g. currently v5.17. I think that's part of the reason.
I probably should have pushed c4f08d7246a5 ("drm/locking: fix __stack_depot_* name conflict") to drm-misc-next-fixes.
There's still something funny going on, because the drm-misc-next pull request [1] isn't part of the drm pull request for v5.16 [2]. Is there going to be another drm pull?
BR, Jani.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211014120452.2wicnt6hobu3kbwb@gilmour [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAPM=9tyOyz4_-OdjDduFkponSXycO6maBDFsWGTLv+j=_Vp6w...