[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220512121029.8157e99756b3172e85ccb474@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 12:10:29 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the mm tree
On Thu, 12 May 2022 14:28:18 +0100 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:
> > > - return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > + orig_pte = get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig);
> > > + flush_tlb_range(vma, addr, addr + pgsize * ncontig);
> > > + return orig_pte;
> > > }
> >
> > Yes, after checking this fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from
> > get_clear_flush()"), I also realized it will miss TLB flush.
> >
> > So I am not sure I need send a incremental patch to fix this issue? Or
> > resend my patch set [1] with rebasing on the arm64 changes?
> >
> > Catalin and Andrew, how do you think? Thanks.
>
> Andrew folding the diff in is fine by me. I presume the mm patches are
> applied on top of the rest of linux-next (and the arm64 commits).
No, the mm patches are based on
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm master branch,
which is -rc4 or thereabouts.
So one of us needs to ensure that Linus gets that patch after the
second of us merges up. I can't test it so I nominate you ;) Against
linux-next or the mm-everything branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists