[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160426150032.6d97757c25bb4cdfb9a345cf@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 15:00:32 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [-mmots 2016-04-25] hugetlb: error: ‘cpu_has_pse’ undeclared
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 23:14:35 +0900 Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> v4.6-rc5-mmots-2016-04-25-17-33
>
>
> In file included from include/linux/hugetlb.h:418:0,
> from fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c:28:
> fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c: In function 'init_hugetlbfs_fs':
> ./arch/x86/include/asm/hugetlb.h:7:31: error: 'cpu_has_pse' undeclared (first use in this function)
> #define hugepages_supported() cpu_has_pse
> ^
hm, how did that happen. I had some issues with cpu_has_pse a number
of days ago but they later went away.
In my current tree I have, in arch/x86/include/asm/hugetlb.h:
#define hugepages_supported() boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PSE)
and that came in from linux-next.patch. I wonder why your tree is
different.
<looks>
OK, http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/linux-next.patch has no
changes to arch/x86/include/asm/hugetlb.h at all. Maybe I fat-fingered
something. Odd.
I have just uploaded a new snapshot - it should be good now. Sorry about
that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists