6.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Mark Harmstone maharmstone@fb.com
[ Upstream commit 7ef3cbf17d2734ca66c4ed8573be45f4e461e7ee ]
The inline function btrfs_is_testing() is hardcoded to return 0 if CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS is not set. Currently we're relying on the compiler optimizing out the call to alloc_test_extent_buffer() in btrfs_find_create_tree_block(), as it's not been defined (it's behind an #ifdef).
Add a stub version of alloc_test_extent_buffer() to avoid linker errors on non-standard optimization levels. This problem was seen on GCC 14 with -O0 and is helps to see symbols that would be otherwise optimized out.
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo wqu@suse.com Signed-off-by: Mark Harmstone maharmstone@fb.com Reviewed-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- fs/btrfs/extent_io.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c index e263d4b0546fa..d322cf82783f9 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent_io.c @@ -2826,10 +2826,10 @@ struct extent_buffer *find_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, return eb; }
-#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS struct extent_buffer *alloc_test_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, u64 start) { +#ifdef CONFIG_BTRFS_FS_RUN_SANITY_TESTS struct extent_buffer *eb, *exists = NULL; int ret;
@@ -2865,8 +2865,11 @@ struct extent_buffer *alloc_test_extent_buffer(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, free_eb: btrfs_release_extent_buffer(eb); return exists; -} +#else + /* Stub to avoid linker error when compiled with optimizations turned off. */ + return NULL; #endif +}
static struct extent_buffer *grab_extent_buffer( struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, struct page *page)