fs: btrfs: Add missing include file
PATCH 1/1 fs: btrfs: Add missing include file
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_IO':fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'iov_iter_alignment'
due to a missing include file.
--- fs/btrfs/inode.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
fs/btrfs/inode.c +1 -0
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@#include <linux/btrfs.h> #include <linux/blkdev.h> #include <linux/posix_acl_xattr.h> +#include <linux/uio.h> #include "ctree.h" #include "disk-io.h" #include "transaction.h"
Signature · 1 line
2.1.0
Quoted 11 lines · Guenter Roeck
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_IO':fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'iov_iter_alignment'due to a missing include file.
Fixes 3737c63e1fb0 ("fs: move struct kiocb to fs.h")Cc Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>---
Forgot to mention: This is for -next.
Guenter
Quoted 18 lines
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)fs/btrfs/inode.c +1
-0@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@#include <linux/btrfs.h> #include <linux/blkdev.h> #include <linux/posix_acl_xattr.h> +#include <linux/uio.h> #include "ctree.h" #include "disk-io.h" #include "transaction.h" Signature · 1 line
2.1.0
Quoted 10 lines · Guenter Roeck
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_IO':fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'iov_iter_alignment'due to a missing include file.
Fixes 3737c63e1fb0 ("fs: move struct kiocb to fs.h")Cc Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>
Thanks.
Quoted 11 lines · Guenter Roeck
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_IO':fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'iov_iter_alignment'due to a missing include file.
Fixes 3737c63e1fb0 ("fs: move struct kiocb to fs.h")Cc Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>---
This problem still affects the following builds as of today.
alpha:allmodconfig
i386:allyesconfig
i386:allmodconfig
m68k:allmodconfig
mips:allmodconfig
xtensa:allmodconfig
and thus probabably many other allmodconfig builds which I don't try to build.
This is getting really annoying, and prevents us from finding and fixing other build problems.
It has been more than two weeks since I submitted the patch. This suggests that the patch got lost otr that the Powers That Be don't care. Which one is it ?
Should I request to revert 3737c63e1fb0 instead ?
Guenter
Quoted 25 lines · Guenter Roeck
Quoted 6 lines · Guenter Roeck
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_IO':
fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'iov_iter_alignment'Quoted 6 lines
due to a missing include file.
Fixes 3737c63e1fb0 ("fs: move struct kiocb to fs.h")Cc Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>---
This problem still affects the following builds as of today.
alpha:allmodconfig
i386:allyesconfig
i386:allmodconfig
m68k:allmodconfig
mips:allmodconfig
xtensa:allmodconfigand thus probabably many other allmodconfig builds which I don't try to build.
Quoted 8 lines
This is getting really annoying, and prevents us from finding and fixing other build problems.
It has been more than two weeks since I submitted the patch. This suggests that the patch got lost otr that the Powers That Be don't care. Which one is it ?
Should I request to revert
3737c63e1fb0instead ?
I'll put the include into my branch for -next, thanks!
-chris
Quoted 28 lines · Chris Mason
Quoted 27 lines · Guenter Roeck
Quoted 11 lines · Guenter Roeck
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_Excellentidea. Done,IO':
fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'iov_iter_alignment'due to a missing include file.
Fixes 3737c63e1fb0 ("fs: move struct kiocb to fs.h")Cc Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>---
This problem still affects the following builds as of today.
alpha:allmodconfig
i386:allyesconfig
i386:allmodconfig
m68k:allmodconfig
mips:allmodconfig
xtensa:allmodconfigand thus probabably many other allmodconfig builds which I don't try to build.
This is getting really annoying, and prevents us from finding and fixing other build problems.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
It has been more than two weeks since I submitted the patch. This suggests that the patch got lost otr that the Powers That Be don't care. Which one is it ?
Should I request to revert
3737c63e1fb0instead ?I'll put the include into my branch for -next, thanks!
I have not seen the problem in the latest -next build, which presumably means that some other patch must have fixed the problem or at least hides it now. No idea which one, though.
Guenter
Quoted 37 lines · Guenter Roeck
Quoted 36 lines · Chris Mason
Quoted 34 lines · Guenter Roeck
Quoted 7 lines · Guenter Roeck
Building alpha:allmodconfig fails with
fs/btrfs/inode.c: In function 'check_direct_Excellentidea.
Done,IO':
fs/btrfs/inode.c:8050:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'iov_iter_alignment'Quoted 6 lines
due to a missing include file.
Fixes 3737c63e1fb0 ("fs: move struct kiocb to fs.h")Cc Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>---
This problem still affects the following builds as of today.
alpha:allmodconfig
i386:allyesconfig
i386:allmodconfig
m68k:allmodconfig
mips:allmodconfig
xtensa:allmodconfigand thus probabably many other allmodconfig builds which I don't try to build.
This is getting really annoying, and prevents us from finding and fixing other build problems.
It has been more than two weeks since I submitted the patch. This suggests that the patch got lost otr that the Powers That Be don't care. Which one is it ?
Should I request to revert
3737c63e1fb0instead ?
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I'll put the include into my branch for -next, thanks!
I have not seen the problem in the latest -next build, which presumably means that some other patch must have fixed the problem or at least hides it now. No idea which one, though.
It's not immediately obvious what might have fixed it, so I'll keep this patch in my -next for today at least ;)
-chris