From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f175.google.com (mail-ig0-f175.google.com [209.85.213.175]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CCDB6B0038 for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 19:12:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by igblo3 with SMTP id lo3so4765414igb.0 for ; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:12:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-x22f.google.com (mail-ig0-x22f.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22f]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n81si155533ioe.61.2015.04.09.16.12.14 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:12:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by igbqf9 with SMTP id qf9so4717591igb.1 for ; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:12:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:12:12 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH] mempool: add missing include In-Reply-To: <6079838.EgducKeYG3@wuerfel> Message-ID: References: <3302342.cNyRUGN06P@wuerfel> <6079838.EgducKeYG3@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrey Ryabinin , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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. I'll do a randconfig loop with my arm cross-compiler and see if I can find any other issues. -- 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