[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F5892B1.3070008@suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 12:06:25 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
CC: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, lwn@....net,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>, raven@...maw.net
Subject: Re: Build broken on s390 and ia64 [was: Linux 2.6.32.58]
On 03/05/2012 11:33 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 01:48:24PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>>>> Linus Torvalds (2): Fix autofs compile without CONFIG_COMPAT
>>>>
>>>> But who defines is_compat_task *with* CONFIG_COMPAT on ia64?
>>>>
>>>> fs/autofs4/inode.c: In function 'autofs4_fill_super':
>>>> fs/autofs4/inode.c:345: error: implicit declaration of function
>>>> 'is_compat_task'
>>>
>>> The ia64 compat code got entirely removed, since it was broken:
>>>
>>> 32974ad4907cdde6c9de612cd1b2ee0568fb9409 "[IA64] Remove COMPAT_IA32 support"
>>
>> Yes, but that is even in 2.6.34. So the fix for autofs is incomplete in
>> .32 as it breaks build on configs which used to work.
>
> So in the end, does anybody have an idea what is missing from this patch ?
> I'm not sure that reverting the autofs fix is a right solution either :-/
Nobody relevant? Hmm... I use the attached patch. If there are no
objections, I will add a header there and send to Willy.
thanks,
--
js
suse labs
View attachment "ia64-is_compat_task-fix.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (438 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists