[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3262455c0ac3bff64522fff47c0281943c9f76ea.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 14:18:06 +0200
From: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Matthew Wilcox
<willy@...radead.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Christian
Koenig <christian.koenig@....com>, Huang Rui <ray.huang@....com>, Matthew
Auld <matthew.auld@...el.com>, Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Maarten Lankhorst
<maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Fix compile error when CONFIG_SHMEM is not set
On Wed, 2025-06-04 at 08:04 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 00:03:18 -0700 (PDT)
> Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > I vote for the "select SHMEM", but Thomas and dri-devel and Linus
> > should decide.
>
> I only tried "depends on SHMEM" which did not work, but it looks like
> "select SHMEM" should.
I agree. The whole ttm_backup implementation is based on backing things
up to shmem objects so IMO it perfectly makes sense to "select SHMEM".
Let me know if you want me to send a patch for that.
In the very unlikely case someone would ever want a config without
SHMEM but with TTM, they'd have to live without the ttm_backup and we'd
create a separate config for that.
/Thomas
>
> I prefer this solution too.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists