* linux-next build failure on arm64 with CMA but !NUMA
@ 2020-03-18 11:41 Guido Günther
2020-03-18 15:37 ` Roman Gushchin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Guido Günther @ 2020-03-18 11:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Roman Gushchin; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-next
Hi Roman,
882d60d2ce725381236a158204d7ec13ff19ab25 in linux-next broke compilation
on arm64 CMA && !NUMA like
CC kernel/irq/irqdesc.o
mm/hugetlb.c: In function ‘hugetlb_cma_reserve’:
mm/hugetlb.c:5449:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘for_each_mem_pfn_range’; did you mean ‘for_each_mem_range’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
for_each_mem_pfn_range(i, nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn, NULL) {
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
for_each_mem_range
mm/hugetlb.c:5449:61: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘{’ token
for_each_mem_pfn_range(i, nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn, NULL) {
^~
Reverting that fixes the build for the moment. Would making all of this
dependent on CMA && NUMA be the right fix?
Cheers,
-- Guido
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next build failure on arm64 with CMA but !NUMA
2020-03-18 11:41 linux-next build failure on arm64 with CMA but !NUMA Guido Günther
@ 2020-03-18 15:37 ` Roman Gushchin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2020-03-18 15:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guido Günther; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-next
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 12:41:09PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> Hi Roman,
> 882d60d2ce725381236a158204d7ec13ff19ab25 in linux-next broke compilation
> on arm64 CMA && !NUMA like
>
> CC kernel/irq/irqdesc.o
> mm/hugetlb.c: In function ‘hugetlb_cma_reserve’:
> mm/hugetlb.c:5449:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘for_each_mem_pfn_range’; did you mean ‘for_each_mem_range’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> for_each_mem_pfn_range(i, nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn, NULL) {
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> for_each_mem_range
> mm/hugetlb.c:5449:61: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘{’ token
> for_each_mem_pfn_range(i, nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn, NULL) {
> ^~
> Reverting that fixes the build for the moment. Would making all of this
> dependent on CMA && NUMA be the right fix?
Hello Guido!
Thank you for the report!
We've been discussing the issue for a couple of days, and I've proposed a fix.
I've just resent it to linux-mm@ (you're in cc), so hopefully it will be merged today.
Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-03-18 15:37 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-03-18 11:41 linux-next build failure on arm64 with CMA but !NUMA Guido Günther
2020-03-18 15:37 ` Roman Gushchin
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox