From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-it0-f71.google.com (mail-it0-f71.google.com [209.85.214.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 835CC6B0003 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:06:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-it0-f71.google.com with SMTP id d70-v6so3299116itd.1 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 9pmail.ess.barracuda.com (9pmail.ess.barracuda.com. [64.235.150.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y8-v6si1878196iof.72.2018.06.21.11.06.46 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:06:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 11:06:38 -0700 From: Paul Burton Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memblock: add missing include Message-ID: <20180621180638.ahxpgzwrztopve55@pburton-laptop> References: <20180606194144.16990-1-malat@debian.org> <20180615121716.37fb93385825b0b2f59240cc@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20180615121716.37fb93385825b0b2f59240cc@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton , Stephen Rothwell Cc: Tony Luck , Mathieu Malaterre , linux-mm@kvack.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Hi Andrew & Stephen, On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 12:17:16PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Sadly that breaks ia64 build: > >=20 > > CC mm/memblock.o > > mm/memblock.c:1340: error: redefinition of =E2=80=98memblock_virt_alloc= _try_nid_raw=E2=80=99 > > ./include/linux/bootmem.h:335: error: previous definition of > > =E2=80=98memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_raw=E2=80=99 was here > > mm/memblock.c:1377: error: redefinition of =E2=80=98memblock_virt_alloc= _try_nid_nopanic=E2=80=99 > > ./include/linux/bootmem.h:343: error: previous definition of > > =E2=80=98memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_nopanic=E2=80=99 was here > > mm/memblock.c:1413: error: redefinition of =E2=80=98memblock_virt_alloc= _try_nid=E2=80=99 > > ./include/linux/bootmem.h:327: error: previous definition of > > =E2=80=98memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid=E2=80=99 was here > > make[1]: *** [mm/memblock.o] Error 1 > > make: *** [mm/memblock.o] Error 2 >=20 > Huh. How did that ever work. I guess it's either this: > and I'm not sure which. I think I'll just revert $subject for now. This is fine now in master after Andrew's revert, but the problematic patch is still being picked up in linux-next somehow. This breaks MIPS builds from linux-next, and presumably the ia64 build too. I'm not sure I understand how it's picked up - next-20180621 appears to based atop 1abd8a8f39cd: $ git show next-20180621:Next/SHA1s | grep -E '^origin\s' origin 1abd8a8f39cd9a2925149000056494523c85643a There we have the Andrew's revert: $ git log --pretty=3Doneline -n5 1abd8a8f39cd mm/memblock.c 6cc22dc08a247b7b4a173e4561e39705a557d300 revert "mm/memblock: add missing= include " 0825a6f98689d847ab8058c51b3a55f0abcc6563 mm: use octal not symbolic permi= ssions 69b5086b12cda645d95f00575c25f1dfd1e929ad mm/memblock: add missing include= 25cf23d7a95716fc6eb165208b5eb2e3b2e86f82 mm/memblock: print memblock_remo= ve 1c4bc43ddfd52cbe5a08bb86ae636f55d2799424 mm/memblock: introduce PHYS_ADDR= _MAX Yet the revert doesn't show up at all in next-20180621..? $ git log --pretty=3Doneline -n5 next-20180621 mm/memblock.c a95f41a659344e221e8ad39e8fbba2e0f419c096 mm: use octal not symbolic permi= ssions 0b558dea04a405800505c7f56eb1638ae761b5d4 mm/memblock: add missing include= 25cf23d7a95716fc6eb165208b5eb2e3b2e86f82 mm/memblock: print memblock_remo= ve 1c4bc43ddfd52cbe5a08bb86ae636f55d2799424 mm/memblock: introduce PHYS_ADDR= _MAX 49a695ba723224875df50e327bd7b0b65dd9a56b Merge tag 'powerpc-4.17-1' of gi= t://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux I was expecting to see the original commit, then the revert, then perhaps a re-application of it but instead it looks like the commits from master are missing entirely after 25cf23d7a957 ("mm/memblock: print memblock_remove"). Maybe I'm missing something about the way the merges for linux-next are done..? In any case, could we get the problematic patch removed from linux-next? Thanks, Paul