[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080703111418.19f568ca.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:14:18 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org,
apw@...dowen.org, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUILD-FAILURE] 2.6.26-rc8-mm1 - x86 -
__ptep_modify_prot_start() missing
On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:00:35 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:59:43 +0530 Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Hi Andrew,
> >>
> >> 2.6.26-rc8-mm1 kernel build fails on the x86
> >>
> >> CC arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.o
> >> arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.c:383: error: _____ptep_modify_prot_start___ undeclared here (not in a function)
> >>
>
> Where did all those _____underlines___ come from?
gcc idiocy - emitting non-ascii characters from a programming tool.
Their survival rate through downstream handling is about 2%. LANG=C
helps.
> >> make[1]: *** [arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.o] Error 1
> >> make: *** [arch/x86/kernel] Error 2
> >>
> >> linux-next patches has the changes to the adds the function
> >> __ptep_modify_prot_start as inline, the patch s390-build-fixes.patch
> >> is coverting it into macro. Reverting the s390-build-fixes.patch
> >> fixes the build failure.
> >>
> >
> > grump. Who did all this stuff?
> >
> > I dunno. I'll drop s390-build-fixes.patch, add some ccs and stomp off.
> >
> >
> > From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> >
> > In file included from include/asm/pgtable.h:1087,
> > from include/linux/mm.h:39,
> > from arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c:8:
> > include/asm-generic/pgtable.h: In function '__ptep_modify_prot_start':
> > include/asm-generic/pgtable.h:209: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
> >
>
> We can't turn them into macros because we're expecting to be able to
> take the address of __ptep_modify_prot_start/commit. What type is not
> defined on s390 at that point? Would simply adding an extra include to
> arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c fix the problem?
>
> In the worst case we could push __ptep_modify_proc_start/commit out of
> line somewhere appropriate, but that's a bit sad given how simple they are.
I think the s390 guys just fixed the original build error.
--
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