On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 02:37:36PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c: In function 'vmx_init':
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11026:2: error: function '_r_a_p__v' is initialized
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c: In function 'vmx_init':
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11026:2: error: function '_r_a_p__v' is initialized like a
variable
rcu_assign_pointer(crash_vmclear_loaded_vmcss,
^
In file
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c: In function 'vmx_init':
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11026:2: error: function '_r_a_p__v' is initialized like a
variable
rcu_assign_pointer(crash_vmclear_loaded_vmcss,
^
In file
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:55:51PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> In file included from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock_types.h:18:0,
> from
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:55:51PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> In file included from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock_types.h:18:0,
> from
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
In file included from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock_types.h:18:0,
from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock.h:81,
from
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
In file included from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock_types.h:18:0,
from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock.h:81,
from
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 09:29:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck()
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> > > exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> > exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building modules.
> > This is 04be76a9b067
On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building modules.
> This is 04be76a9b067 (locktorture: Support rtmutex torturing) in -rcu.
>
> Thoughts?
Right,
On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building modules.
> This is 04be76a9b067 (locktorture: Support rtmutex torturing) in -rcu.
>
> Thoughts?
Right,
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> > > exported, so that Stephen
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 09:29:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Davidlohr, the error is due to
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> > exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building modules.
> > This is 04be76a9b067
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 01:58:00PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 00:49:46 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
Hi Paul,
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 00:49:46 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck"
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
> ERROR: "percpu_down_write"
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
> ERROR: "percpu_down_write"
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 01:58:00PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 00:49:46 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's
Hi Paul,
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 00:49:46 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > ERROR:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "percpu_down_write" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "percpu_up_write"
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "percpu_down_write" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "percpu_up_write"
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
> > > patch
> > > that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
> > patch
> > that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will also queue
> > a
> > revert of the patch
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
> patch
> that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will also queue a
> revert of the patch below for 4.4.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:35:28AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:40:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > Hi Paul,
> > > >
> > > > After merging the rcu
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:40:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
> >
* Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:40:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:35:28AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:40:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the
* Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
patch
that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will also queue a
revert of the patch below for 4.4.
Thoughts?
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
patch
that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will also queue
a
revert
* Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Paul E. McKenney paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
patch
that renames
Hi Paul,
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:51:38 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> Thank you in both cases! I suspect that more will follow, so is there
> something I can do to make this easier? (Hard for me to patch stuff
> that is not yet in the tree...)
No, that is what I am here for. But it
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
> kernel/notifier.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
kernel/notifier.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'rcu_lockdep_assert' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
kernel/notifier.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'rcu_lockdep_assert' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
Hi Paul,
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:51:38 -0700 Paul E. McKenney
paul...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
Thank you in both cases! I suspect that more will follow, so is there
something I can do to make this easier? (Hard for me to patch stuff
that is not yet in the tree...)
No, that is what I am
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
kernel/notifier.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:34:05PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
> > > failed like this:
> > >
* Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
> > init/main.c:387:2: error:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
> init/main.c:387:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
failed like this:
init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
init/main.c:387:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'smpboot_thread_init' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
smpboot_thread_init();
^
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
failed like this:
init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
init/main.c:387:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'smpboot_thread_init' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
smpboot_thread_init();
^
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
failed like this:
init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
init/main.c:387:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'smpboot_thread_init'
* Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
failed like this:
init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
init/main.c:387:2: error: implicit
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:34:05PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
failed like this:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 01:18:56PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/x86/xen/smp.c: In function 'xen_cpu_up':
> arch/x86/xen/smp.c:460:6: error: 'err' undeclared (first use in this
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
arch/x86/xen/smp.c: In function 'xen_cpu_up':
arch/x86/xen/smp.c:460:6: error: 'err' undeclared (first use in this function)
if (err)
^
Caused by commit b92c23b083d6 ("x86: Use common
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 01:18:56PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
arch/x86/xen/smp.c: In function 'xen_cpu_up':
arch/x86/xen/smp.c:460:6: error: 'err' undeclared (first use in this
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
arch/x86/xen/smp.c: In function 'xen_cpu_up':
arch/x86/xen/smp.c:460:6: error: 'err' undeclared (first use in this function)
if (err)
^
Caused by commit b92c23b083d6 (x86: Use common
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 12:20:50PM -0500, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
> >> "select SRCU" to "config PPC" in
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 12:20:50PM -0500, Pranith Kumar wrote:
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
select SRCU to config PPC
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
>> "select SRCU" to "config PPC" in arch/powerpc/Kconfig. Are you able
>> to cross-build powerpc?
>>
>
> ppc 32
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
> "select SRCU" to "config PPC" in arch/powerpc/Kconfig. Are you able
> to cross-build powerpc?
>
ppc 32 seems fine without selecting srcu unconditionally. So I added
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 06:51:20PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
> from
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 06:51:20PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
select SRCU to config PPC in arch/powerpc/Kconfig. Are you able
to cross-build powerpc?
ppc 32 seems fine without selecting srcu unconditionally. So I added
this
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
select SRCU to config PPC in arch/powerpc/Kconfig. Are you able
to cross-build powerpc?
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 05:12:15PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
> from
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 05:12:15PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:03:57AM -0500, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On 12/10/2014 03:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> > allnoconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > In file included from
On 12/10/2014 03:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
> from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
>
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
On 12/10/2014 03:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:03:57AM -0500, Pranith Kumar wrote:
On 12/10/2014 03:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:42:30PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> include/linux/notifier.h:51:4: warning: its scope is only this definition or
> declaration, which is probably not
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allnoconfig) failed like this:
include/linux/notifier.h:51:4: warning: its scope is only this definition or
declaration, which is probably not what you want
In file included from include/linux/memory_hotplug.h:6:0,
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allnoconfig) failed like this:
include/linux/notifier.h:51:4: warning: its scope is only this definition or
declaration, which is probably not what you want
In file included from include/linux/memory_hotplug.h:6:0,
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:42:30PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allnoconfig) failed like this:
include/linux/notifier.h:51:4: warning: its scope is only this definition or
declaration, which is probably not what you
101 - 177 of 177 matches
Mail list logo