Subject: linux-next: build failure after merge of the block tree

From: Mark Brown <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 16:40:26 +0100

Hi all,

After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:

In file included from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/printk.h:10,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/kernel.h:31,
                 from /tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:5:
/tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c: In function 'blk_validate_atomic_write_limits':
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:222:35: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
  222 |         (void)(((typeof((n)) *)0) == ((uint64_t *)0));  \
      |                                   ^~
/tmp/next/build/include/linux/once_lite.h:28:41: note: in definition of macro 'DO_ONCE_LITE_IF'
   28 |                 bool __ret_do_once = !!(condition);                     \
      |                                         ^~~~~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:200:21: note: in expansion of macro 'WARN_ON_ONCE'
  200 |                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(do_div(chunk_sectors, boundary_sectors)))
      |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:200:34: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  200 |                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(do_div(chunk_sectors, boundary_sectors)))
      |                                  ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:234:32: warning: right shift count >= width of type [-Wshift-count-overflow]
  234 |         } else if (likely(((n) >> 32) == 0)) {          \
      |                                ^~
/tmp/next/build/include/linux/once_lite.h:28:41: note: in definition of macro 'DO_ONCE_LITE_IF'
   28 |                 bool __ret_do_once = !!(condition);                     \
      |                                         ^~~~~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:200:21: note: in expansion of macro 'WARN_ON_ONCE'
  200 |                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(do_div(chunk_sectors, boundary_sectors)))
      |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:234:20: note: in expansion of macro 'likely'
  234 |         } else if (likely(((n) >> 32) == 0)) {          \
      |                    ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:200:34: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  200 |                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(do_div(chunk_sectors, boundary_sectors)))
      |                                  ^~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/include/asm-generic/div64.h:238:36: error: passing argument 1 of '__div64_32' from incompatible pointer type [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types]
  238 |                 __rem = __div64_32(&(n), __base);       \
      |                                    ^~~~
      |                                    |
      |                                    unsigned int *
/tmp/next/build/include/linux/once_lite.h:28:41: note: in definition of macro 'DO_ONCE_LITE_IF'
   28 |                 bool __ret_do_once = !!(condition);                     \
      |                                         ^~~~~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:200:21: note: in expansion of macro 'WARN_ON_ONCE'
  200 |                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(do_div(chunk_sectors, boundary_sectors)))
      |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~
/tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:200:34: note: in expansion of macro 'do_div'
  200 |                 if (WARN_ON_ONCE(do_div(chunk_sectors, boundary_sectors)))
      |                                  ^~~~~~
In file included from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/math.h:6,
                 from /tmp/next/build/include/linux/kernel.h:27,
                 from /tmp/next/build/block/blk-settings.c:5:
/tmp/next/build/arch/arm/include/asm/div64.h:24:45: note: expected 'uint64_t *' {aka 'long long unsigned int *'} but argument is of type 'unsigned int *'
   24 | static inline uint32_t __div64_32(uint64_t *n, uint32_t base)
      |                                   ~~~~~~~~~~^
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors

Caused by commit

  9da3d1e912f ("block: Add core atomic write support")

I have used the version from yesterday instead.