[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250317105702.GD34541@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:57:02 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, jirislaby@...nel.org,
ubizjak@...il.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.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 tip tree
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 09:52:07PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:38:56 +0100 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > Right. Sorry for not noticing before, and thanks Jiri for poking me.
> >
> > So the below resolution make it go for me. The problem appears to be
> > that due to:
> >
> > bcecd5a529c1 ("percpu: repurpose __percpu tag as a named address space qualifier")
> >
> > this makes that this_cpu_ptr() wants a '__percpu *', instead we feed it
> > '__percpu**' which confuses things.
> >
> > What would be the best way around to getting this resolved, should I
> > stick the below in a fixup patch in tip/perf/core, or do we carry this
> > in a merge resolution somewhere?
>
> Its a conflict between the mm tree and the tip tree, so I will carry it
> as a resolution in -next and you all should let Linus know when the
> pull requests get sent.
>
> I will use your resolution from tomorrow.
I pushed it out as a fix in tip/perf/core, figured it wouldn't hurt and
it wont get lost.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists