[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1jy9gmyM=8LDTVep_zqxfhG05dgCyxvn=69NVR+Xmnqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 14:57:40 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
Cc: Bernard Metzler <bmt@...ich.ibm.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rdma/siw: fix NOMMU build
On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 9:34 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com> wrote:
> > @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ struct siw_umem *siw_umem_get(u64 start, u64 len, bool writable)
> > unsigned int foll_flags = FOLL_WRITE;
> > int num_pages, num_chunks, i, rv = 0;
> >
> > - if (!can_do_mlock())
> > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MMU) || !can_do_mlock())
> > return ERR_PTR(-EPERM);
>
> I feel like !CONFIG_MMU should provide a dummy inline stub for can_do_mlock
> instead?
Fair enough. I've added that to my test tree in place of my first patch
and will send it after some more build testing.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists