Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (tip/s390 trees related)

From: Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:36:24 +0200

* Peter Zijlstra <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:02 +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> >   CC      mm/huge_memory.o
> > mm/huge_memory.c: In function ???do_huge_pmd_prot_none???:
> > mm/huge_memory.c:789:3: error: incompatible type for argument 3 of ???update_mmu_cache???
> 
> That appears to have become update_mmu_cache_pmd(), which 
> makes sense given that there's now architectures that care 
> about it.

Ok, I fixed it as per below. Does everyone agree?

Thanks,

	Ingo

---------------->
>>From 6e683978132907ff339e8a01a4d901c75709e62c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:33:01 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] MIPS/thp: Fix update_mmu_cache() cache call

As per recent upstream commit:

  b113da65785d mm: Add and use update_mmu_cache_pmd() in transparent huge page code.

The call in do_huge_pmd_prot_none() needs to call update_mmu_cache_pmd()
as well.

This resolves a MIPS build error triggered on linux-next.

Reported-by: Ralf Baechle <[email-masked]>
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <[email-masked]>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email-masked]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]>
---
 mm/huge_memory.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 8100c01..57c5018 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ fixup:
 	/* change back to regular protection */
 	entry = pmd_modify(entry, vma->vm_page_prot);
 	set_pmd_at(mm, haddr, pmd, entry);
-	update_mmu_cache(vma, address, entry);
+	update_mmu_cache_pmd(vma, address, entry);
 
 unlock:
 	spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);