On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 08:14:43AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> Hi Tomasz,
> 
> kernel test robot noticed the following build errors:
> 
> [auto build test ERROR on cxl/next]
> [also build test ERROR on linus/master v7.1-rc4 next-20260519]
> [cannot apply to cxl/pending]
> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
> 
> url:    
> https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Tomasz-Wolski/dax-bus-Upgrade-resource-conflict-message-to-dev_err-in-alloc_dax_region/20260519-182401
> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cxl/cxl.git next
> patch link:    
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260519101832.31988-1-tomasz.wolski%40fujitsu.com
> patch subject: [PATCH v2] dax/bus: Upgrade resource conflict message to 
> dev_err() in alloc_dax_region()
> config: s390-randconfig-r072-20260520 
> (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260520/[email protected]/config)
> compiler: s390-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.5.0
> smatch: v0.5.0-9185-gbcc58b9c
> reproduce (this is a W=1 build): 
> (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20260520/[email protected]/reproduce)
> 
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version 
> of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> | Closes: 
> https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
> 
> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
> 
> >> ERROR: modpost: "request_resource_conflict" [drivers/dax/dax.ko] undefined!
> 

Sorry Tomasz - I thought request_resource_conflict() looked sweet, but
apparently it's only available to built-in kernel code and not to
modules. I'd probably try a prep patch exporting it, based on looking
at its kernel doc comment and neighbots in kernel/resource.c that are
exported.

-- Alison



> --
> 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
> https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
> 

Reply via email to