From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-f180.google.com (mail-ie0-f180.google.com [209.85.223.180]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6137B6B0038 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 19:22:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by iebmp1 with SMTP id mp1so4927472ieb.0 for ; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ie0-x232.google.com (mail-ie0-x232.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4001:c03::232]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qr1si496071igb.16.2015.04.09.16.22.41 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:22:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iedfl3 with SMTP id fl3so5509298ied.1 for ; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:22:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <3302342.cNyRUGN06P@wuerfel> <6079838.EgducKeYG3@wuerfel> Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:22:41 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mempool: add missing include From: Jim Davis Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: David Rientjes Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrey Ryabinin , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 4:12 PM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 9 Apr 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> > > This is a fix^3 for the mempool poisoning patch, which introduces >> > > a compile-time error on some ARM randconfig builds: >> > > >> > > mm/mempool.c: In function 'check_element': >> > > mm/mempool.c:65:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'kmap_atomic' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >> > > void *addr = kmap_atomic((struct page *)element); >> > > >> > > The problem is clearly the missing declaration, and including >> > > linux/highmem.h fixes it. >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann >> > > Fixes: a3db5a8463b0db ("mm, mempool: poison elements backed by page allocator fix fix") >> > >> > Acked-by: David Rientjes >> > >> > Thanks! Can you confirm that this is because CONFIG_BLOCK is disabled and >> > not something else? >> >> Unfortunately I've lost the information which build was responsible >> for this error (normally I keep it, but my script failed here because the >> same config introduced two new regressions). CONFIG_BLOCK sounds plausible >> here. >> >> If necessary, I can repeat the last few hundred builds without this >> patch to find out what it was. >> > > Ok, thanks. The only reason I ask is because if this is CONFIG_BLOCK then > it shouldn't be arm specific and nothing else has reported it. The random configuration file included in http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=142851035816974&w=2 doesn't have CONFIG_BLOCK set. That build failure was on an x86_32 system. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org