From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B43429408; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 00:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754872755; cv=none; b=bv0xvMT7oCGVBdHjpj/ZoXU52ekZo7CpDO1j8ISLTengSMC6YKYbqmU2A4zRI3dZEoYlWi8Q4d+tonpuPSBoxHiXZaASm3fa3Asv+QJ/R+vGzdk6we3utIsWp1nYfYsCkKoEWQ6rYkdoQ9yU64/7H1hLqv35ZY2dlXvif6MzgUg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754872755; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kPeMuCB6QJFDshLklF3UYJhha1x4oPLphCzKTQrOa4Y=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=fndiEU5Asr1hgIz6F8coeikEj2vMi5kHloyI1HRVV0XI4S4EZXYpvE9Jcb8HD37EHBbaHAF1EyxbVP07hJzYmgmylkApV5gE+sSmmafuIquvsLQ5b6YF8BmQjK166rKXb+9lY4Z4WfAefrpmsh8iS5JLk9zfUWrJ4uXSbTLaxbA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=YuPUK9hD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="YuPUK9hD" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46A8FC4CEEB; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 00:39:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1754872754; bh=kPeMuCB6QJFDshLklF3UYJhha1x4oPLphCzKTQrOa4Y=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=YuPUK9hDPxCpKa66dyL/UiyJ+wbhsRiD0E3lieYtSfuDRaGydSxm92u/E5o6ywhF6 tCFlfBifJyVrfJgHUw174xlEz0VYi2INOXZUCqpEKdiP9ntHgSJhCwd3z9cFguMMwy wTUbUuFTX2YrjPY0U7F+E3TWgammprGWK+7cqFmlsS3MCEyH9vAoMq78XQrQN6AYPS I0XdGSsIum1u1wgocGgcNwroaWNV9YJovFMpUFdhHa2tAQmw2aySTovEkMPdTRoYSF Ih1EBAVGdVIyT5j6lapdHz8KkLsbw0++f9g8cn8rgEzOX0ra4He2qbVKCMLyfLY9bw ddhfo/4cRm1sw== Message-ID: <0ea8a29e-550e-4d3e-9e25-e3b6e64e05a0@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:39:06 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] scsi: sd: Fix build warning in sd_revalidate_disk() To: Abinash Singh Cc: James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, bvanassche@acm.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com, kernel test robot References: <20250809093507.372430-1-abinashsinghlalotra@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Damien Le Moal Organization: Western Digital Research In-Reply-To: <20250809093507.372430-1-abinashsinghlalotra@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 8/9/25 18:35, Abinash Singh wrote: > This v6 series follows up on v5 of the "scsi: sd: Fix build warning in > sd_revalidate_disk()" patches. > In v5, the change was split into two > patches: the first patch refactors sd_revalidate_disk() to return void, > and the second patch addresses excessive stack usage by allocating > certain structures dynamically. > > Apologies for the oversight in v5 — although I built and tested the > kernel locally with the correct changes, I mistakenly sent an older > version of patch 2/2 that still had `size(*lim)` instead of > `sizeof(*lim)`. This caused a build error reported by the kernel test > robot when building with clang. > > Changes in v6: > - Replace `size(*lim)` with `sizeof(*lim)` in patch 2/2 > > > Now there are no build errors. > I am very sorry for that . > > Reported-by: kernel test robot > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202508091640.gvFPjI6O-lkp@intel.com/ > > > Abinash Singh (2): > scsi: sd: make sd_revalidate_disk() return void > scsi: sd: Fix build warning in sd_revalidate_disk() The order of the patches must be reversed because the fix build warning patch must be CC-ed to stable with a Fixes tag. The cleanup making sd_revalidate_disk() a void function must come after the fix. That will avoid the weird placeholder comment and also will allow a more extensive cleanup to replace several "goto out" with a simple return. > > drivers/scsi/sd.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research