[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200110135238.GA9315@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 13:52:38 +0000
From: Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
To: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 10
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:11:41AM +0000, Anders Roxell wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 at 09:07, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Changes since 20200109:
>
> I see the following build error on arm64:
>
> ../arch/arm64/mm/dump.c: In function ‘ptdump_walk’:
> ../arch/arm64/mm/dump.c:326:2: error: too few arguments to function
> ‘ptdump_walk_pgd’
> ptdump_walk_pgd(&st.ptdump, info->mm);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from ../arch/arm64/mm/dump.c:18:
> ../include/linux/ptdump.h:20:6: note: declared here
> void ptdump_walk_pgd(struct ptdump_state *st, struct mm_struct *mm,
> pgd_t *pgd);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ../arch/arm64/mm/dump.c: In function ‘ptdump_check_wx’:
> ../arch/arm64/mm/dump.c:364:2: error: too few arguments to function
> ‘ptdump_walk_pgd’
> ptdump_walk_pgd(&st.ptdump, &init_mm);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from ../arch/arm64/mm/dump.c:18:
> ../include/linux/ptdump.h:20:6: note: declared here
> void ptdump_walk_pgd(struct ptdump_state *st, struct mm_struct *mm,
> pgd_t *pgd);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> make[3]: *** [../scripts/Makefile.build:266: arch/arm64/mm/dump.o] Error 1
> make[3]: Target '__build' not remade because of errors.
> make[2]: *** [../scripts/Makefile.build:503: arch/arm64/mm] Error 2
> make[2]: Target '__build' not remade because of errors.
> make[1]: *** [/srv/jenkins/kernel/randconfig/Makefile:1683: arch/arm64] Error 2
>
> I think something happened when applying patch [1], the changes in
> arch/arm64/mm/dump.c
> got dropped somehow. What that intended ?
>
Indeed this chunk appears to be missing in Andrew's version of the
patch[1] too. Clearly the interface change needs to be included in the
arm64 code. Perhaps the "x86" tag in the subject caused confusion?
Steve
[1] https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/x86-mm-avoid-allocating-struct-mm_struct-on-the-stack.patch
>
> Cheers,
> Anders
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200108145710.34314-1-steven.price@arm.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists