[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080428172636.GF7334@c2.user-mode-linux.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:26:36 -0400
From: Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>
Subject: Re: [git pull] generic bitops, take 2
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 07:22:22PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > It also makes me wonder why Kconfig.i386 can just include
> > arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu, but x86_64 cannot?
>
> hm, indeed arch/um/Kconfig.i386 is assymetric to Kconfig.x86_64. Jeff
> Cc:-ed.
In current git, they look pretty symmetric to me, and it boots and runs.
> arch/um/os-Linux/helper.c: In function 'run_helper':
> arch/um/os-Linux/helper.c:73: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared (first use in this function)
>
> it needs the patch below.
Applied, thanks.
> then it fails with:
>
> mm/filemap.c: In function '__generic_file_aio_write_nolock':
> mm/filemap.c:1831: sorry, unimplemented: inlining failed in call to
> 'generic_write_checks': function body not available
Looks like Adrian just hit that too. As Linus pointed out,
__generic_file_aio_write_nolock calls generic_write_checks at line
2383, and that's available at line 1831, which the error message
helpfully points out. I don't see how gcc can be claiming that the
function body isn't available when it's telling you exactly where it
is.
Jeff
--
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists