linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH mmotm] x86/numa: fix build when CONFIG

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20200825165214.2b5e1fbf53d68fd3714c8050@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 25 Aug 2020 16:52:14 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mmotm] x86/numa: fix build when CONFIG_ACPI is not set

On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 08:20:27 -0700 Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:

> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> 
> Fix build errors when CONFIG_ACPI is not set/enabled by adding
> <acpi/acpi_numa.h> in the #else (!CONFIG_ACPI) block.
> 
> ../arch/x86/mm/numa.c: In function ‘numa_setup’:
> ../arch/x86/mm/numa.c:43:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘disable_srat’; did you mean ‘disable_irq’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>    disable_srat();
>    ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> ../arch/x86/mm/numa.c:45:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘disable_hmat’; did you mean ‘disable_dma’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>    disable_hmat();
>    ^~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ...
>
> --- mmotm-2020-0824-1606.orig/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ mmotm-2020-0824-1606/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -709,6 +709,8 @@ static inline u64 acpi_arch_get_root_poi
>  #define ACPI_HANDLE_FWNODE(fwnode)	(NULL)
>  #define ACPI_DEVICE_CLASS(_cls, _msk)	.cls = (0), .cls_msk = (0),
>  
> +#include <acpi/acpi_numa.h>
> +
>  struct fwnode_handle;
>  
>  static inline bool acpi_dev_found(const char *hid)

I don't think there's anything in -next that caused this?  It's in
mainline also?