From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f200.google.com (mail-io0-f200.google.com [209.85.223.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57F6E6B0005 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 18:57:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-io0-f200.google.com with SMTP id i129so16145914ioi.1 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:57:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id o128sor1050526ioo.295.2018.02.26.15.57.35 for (Google Transport Security); Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:57:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:57:32 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Provide consistent declaration for num_poisoned_pages In-Reply-To: <1519686565-8224-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> Message-ID: References: <1519686565-8224-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthias Kaehlcke On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Guenter Roeck wrote: > clang reports the following compile warning. > > In file included from mm/vmscan.c:56: > ./include/linux/swapops.h:327:22: warning: > section attribute is specified on redeclared variable [-Wsection] > extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages __read_mostly; > ^ > ./include/linux/mm.h:2585:22: note: previous declaration is here > extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages; > ^ > > Let's use __read_mostly everywhere. > > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck > Cc: Matthias Kaehlcke > --- > include/linux/mm.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > index ad06d42adb1a..bd4bd59f02c1 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > @@ -2582,7 +2582,7 @@ extern int get_hwpoison_page(struct page *page); > extern int sysctl_memory_failure_early_kill; > extern int sysctl_memory_failure_recovery; > extern void shake_page(struct page *p, int access); > -extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages; > +extern atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages __read_mostly; > extern int soft_offline_page(struct page *page, int flags); > > No objection to the patch, of course, but I'm wondering if it's (1) the only such clang compile warning for mm/, and (2) if the re-declaration in mm.h could be avoided by including swapops.h? -- 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