[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2FHrrcDZfynjG7BdJVd2wxrWMOMO7dO4wjb1h8_jkRtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 15:21:11 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: André Almeida <andrealmeid@...labora.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-sh list <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: spinlock.c:306:9: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_write_lock_nested'
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 2:15 PM André Almeida <andrealmeid@...labora.com> wrote:
> Às 04:49 de 24/11/21, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:31 AM Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> wrote:
> >> On 11/23/21 5:38 AM, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> >> @@ -451,3 +451,4 @@
> >> 446 common landlock_restrict_self sys_landlock_restrict_self
> >> # 447 reserved for memfd_secret
> >> 448 common process_mrelease sys_process_mrelease
> >> +449 common futex_waitv sys_futex_waitv
> >
> > I don't know what's going on with this one, I don't actually see
> > a reason why it isn't already wired up on all architectures. If we add
> > this, it should probably be done for all architectures at once as a
> > bugfix, but it's possible that this is intentionally only used on
> > x86 and arm.
> >
> > André, can you comment on this?
> >
> I've added entries for the archs that I've actually tested, but there
> should not be any arch-specific problems in futex_waitv. I'll submit a
> patch to wire it up for the remaining architectures.
Ok, thank you.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists