On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 12:14:39AM +0200, Kevin Brodsky wrote: > On 04/09/2025 19:28, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > Hi Kevin, > > > > This is causing a build failure: > > > > In file included from ./include/linux/mm.h:31, > > from mm/userfaultfd.c:8: > > mm/userfaultfd.c: In function ‘move_present_ptes’: > > ./include/linux/pgtable.h:247:41: error: statement with no effect > > [-Werror=unused-value] > > 247 | #define arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode() (LAZY_MMU_DEFAULT) > > | ^ > > mm/userfaultfd.c:1103:9: note: in expansion of macro > > ‘arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode’ > > 1103 | arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode(); > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ./include/linux/pgtable.h:248:54: error: expected expression before ‘)’ > > token > > 248 | #define arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode(state) ((void)(state)) > > | ^ > > mm/userfaultfd.c:1141:9: note: in expansion of macro > > ‘arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode’ > > 1141 | arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode(); > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > It seems you haven't carefully checked call sites here, please do very > > carefully recheck these - I see Yeoreum reported a mising kasan case, so I > > suggest you just aggressively grep this + make sure you've covered all > > bases :) > > I did check all call sites pretty carefully and of course build-tested, > but my series is based on v6.17-rc4 - just like the calls Yeoreum > mentioned, the issue is that those calls are in mm-stable but not in > mainline :/ I suppose I should post a v2 rebased on mm-stable ASAP then?
You should really base on mm-new. You need to account for everything that is potentially going to go upstream. mm-stable is generally not actually populated all too well until shortly before merge window anyway. > > - Kevin Thanks, Lorenzo
