Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

From: Zi Yan Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 09:17:21 -0400 > From: Zi Yan > > THP migration is added but only supports x86_64 at the moment. For all > other architectures, swp_entry_to_pmd() only returns a zero pmd_t. > > Due to a GCC zero initializer bug

Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

From: Zi Yan Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 09:17:21 -0400 > From: Zi Yan > > THP migration is added but only supports x86_64 at the moment. For all > other architectures, swp_entry_to_pmd() only returns a zero pmd_t. > > Due to a GCC zero initializer bug #53119, the standard (pmd_t){0} > initializer

Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

Thanks for you reply. Sorry. I did not know there is a patchwork to track the state. -- Best Regards Yan Zi On 10 Aug 2017, at 12:28, David Miller wrote: > From: "Zi Yan" > Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:46:08 -0400 > >> Ping. Just wonder what is the status of this patch. >

Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

Thanks for you reply. Sorry. I did not know there is a patchwork to track the state. -- Best Regards Yan Zi On 10 Aug 2017, at 12:28, David Miller wrote: > From: "Zi Yan" > Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:46:08 -0400 > >> Ping. Just wonder what is the status of this patch. > > You never need to ask

Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

From: "Zi Yan" Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:46:08 -0400 > Ping. Just wonder what is the status of this patch. You never need to ask this question. Your patch is queued up in SPARC patchwork: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/797215/ And is in "Under Review" state.

Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

From: "Zi Yan" Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:46:08 -0400 > Ping. Just wonder what is the status of this patch. You never need to ask this question. Your patch is queued up in SPARC patchwork: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/797215/ And is in "Under Review" state. There is nothing for

Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

Ping. Just wonder what is the status of this patch. This patch is trivial and I successfully compiled it for sparc32. swp_entry_to_pmd() will be the only user of __pmd() in sparc32, returning __pmd(0). Having __pmd() can help replace following code in include/linux/swapops.h (in linux-next:

Re: [PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

Ping. Just wonder what is the status of this patch. This patch is trivial and I successfully compiled it for sparc32. swp_entry_to_pmd() will be the only user of __pmd() in sparc32, returning __pmd(0). Having __pmd() can help replace following code in include/linux/swapops.h (in linux-next:

[PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

From: Zi Yan THP migration is added but only supports x86_64 at the moment. For all other architectures, swp_entry_to_pmd() only returns a zero pmd_t. Due to a GCC zero initializer bug #53119, the standard (pmd_t){0} initializer is not accepted by all GCC versions.

[PATCH] mm: add pmd_t initializer __pmd() to work around a GCC bug.

From: Zi Yan THP migration is added but only supports x86_64 at the moment. For all other architectures, swp_entry_to_pmd() only returns a zero pmd_t. Due to a GCC zero initializer bug #53119, the standard (pmd_t){0} initializer is not accepted by all GCC versions. __pmd() is a feasible