From: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [akpm-mm:mm-unstable 9/30] mm/memory-tiers.c:64:6: error: redefinition of 'folio_has_cpupid'
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 17:51:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E4FF383F-079B-4F72-97F4-BC9EF83F3C40@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240723144520.465d13ed2b48613c43028426@linux-foundation.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1882 bytes --]
On 23 Jul 2024, at 17:45, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 12:35:23 -0400 Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
>>> > 64 bool folio_has_cpupid(struct folio *folio)
>>> 65 {
>>> 66 return !(sysctl_numa_balancing_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_MEMORY_TIERING) ||
>>> 67 node_is_toptier(folio_nid(folio));
>>> 68 }
>>> 69
>>
>> The error has been reported by Lorenzo Stoakes at: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/6effd690-3cf2-46bc-8061-2d19922ad4fa@lucifer.local/.
>> I will fix it in the next version.
>
> a) "in the next version" is too casual, sorry. We broke the build! Panic!
> I'll apply this:
>
> --- a/mm/memory-tiers.c~memory-tiering-introduce-folio_has_cpupid-check-fix
> +++ a/mm/memory-tiers.c
> @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ static const struct bus_type memory_tier
> .dev_name = "memory_tier",
> };
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
> /**
> * folio_has_cpupid - check if a folio has cpupid information
> * @folio: folio to check
> @@ -66,6 +67,7 @@ bool folio_has_cpupid(struct folio *foli
> return !(sysctl_numa_balancing_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_MEMORY_TIERING) ||
> node_is_toptier(folio_nid(folio));
> }
> +#endif
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_MIGRATION
> static int top_tier_adistance;
> _
Thanks. It does fix the build issue.
>
> b) is a next version planned so soon? If so, why was this version
> sent? Please try to avoid sending an entire new patchset for a few
> trivial fixups. Just send the fixups!
There is a discussion on renaming folio_has_cpupid in patch 2[1]. I am
waiting for the feedback before sending out a new version. The new
version renames the function and reverse the logic. I assume it does not
count as fixups. Let me know if you think otherwise.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/D2WXTV2186EV.2OTDTPCJSNVN1@nvidia.com/
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 854 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-23 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-23 16:32 kernel test robot
2024-07-23 16:35 ` Zi Yan
2024-07-23 21:45 ` Andrew Morton
2024-07-23 21:51 ` Zi Yan [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E4FF383F-079B-4F72-97F4-BC9EF83F3C40@nvidia.com \
--to=ziy@nvidia.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox