* testing (Was: Re: linux-next: scsi-post-merge tree build failure)
@ 2008-12-22 23:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2008-12-22 23:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Cc: Blanchard, Hollis, linuxppc-dev, linux-next, Paul Mackerras
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1640 bytes --]
Hi Ben,
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 07:56:32 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 01:25 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul, Ben,
> >
> > Today's linux-next build (powerpc ppc44x_config) failed like this:
> >
> > arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c: In function 'kvm_arch_vcpu_put':
> > arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c:333: error: implicit declaration of function '_tlbil_all'
> >
> > Probably caused by commit 2a4aca1144394653269720ffbb5a325a77abd5fa
> > ("powerpc/mm: Split low level tlb invalidate for nohash processors").
> > Reverting just that commit was too difficult, so I have reverted the
> > powerpc tree for today.
>
> You can't revert that without reverting my whole series.
I know that ... I tried.
> Adding a #include ../mm/mmu_decl.h to the kvm code should fix it for
> now.
>
> I need to talk to hollis about the right way to do that stuff in
> the long run but it might be it... those _tlbil things are low level
> stuff that aren't supposed to be used by the outside world which is
> why I moved the declarations there, but KVM is also low level :-)
So, why is this series in powerpc/next at all if some of the modified
files haven't even been compiled? A simple ppc44x_defconfig build of the
powerpc/next tree fails - which I would have thought would be part of the
testing since KVM is only implemented for 44x on powerpc.
(Sorry, I am annoyed - it was late when I finally found this build
failure on top of everything else.)
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: testing (Was: Re: linux-next: scsi-post-merge tree build failure)
2008-12-22 23:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2008-12-23 0:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2008-12-23 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Paul Mackerras, linuxppc-dev, linux-next, Kumar Gala,
Hollis Blanchard
On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 10:04 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> So, why is this series in powerpc/next at all if some of the modified
> files haven't even been compiled?
Because nobody spotted the problem while the series was out for review ?
> A simple ppc44x_defconfig build of the
> powerpc/next tree fails - which I would have thought would be part of the
> testing since KVM is only implemented for 44x on powerpc.
>
> (Sorry, I am annoyed - it was late when I finally found this build
> failure on top of everything else.)
I have about 3 44x configs in my build tests. KVM happens not to be
enabled in any of them :-( I'll add this ppc4xx_defconfig to the lot, I
didn't know it existed in fact.
Cheers,
Ben.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: testing (Was: Re: linux-next: scsi-post-merge tree build failure)
@ 2008-12-23 0:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt @ 2008-12-23 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: linuxppc-dev, linux-next, Paul Mackerras, Hollis Blanchard
On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 10:04 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> So, why is this series in powerpc/next at all if some of the modified
> files haven't even been compiled?
Because nobody spotted the problem while the series was out for review ?
> A simple ppc44x_defconfig build of the
> powerpc/next tree fails - which I would have thought would be part of the
> testing since KVM is only implemented for 44x on powerpc.
>
> (Sorry, I am annoyed - it was late when I finally found this build
> failure on top of everything else.)
I have about 3 44x configs in my build tests. KVM happens not to be
enabled in any of them :-( I'll add this ppc4xx_defconfig to the lot, I
didn't know it existed in fact.
Cheers,
Ben.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: testing (Was: Re: linux-next: scsi-post-merge tree build failure)
2008-12-22 23:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2008-12-23 1:52 ` Josh Boyer
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2008-12-23 1:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Blanchard, Hollis, linuxppc-dev,
linux-next, Paul Mackerras
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 10:04:56AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>Hi Ben,
>
>On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 07:56:32 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 01:25 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> > Hi Paul, Ben,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next build (powerpc ppc44x_config) failed like this:
>> >
>> > arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c: In function 'kvm_arch_vcpu_put':
>> > arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c:333: error: implicit declaration of function '_tlbil_all'
>> >
>> > Probably caused by commit 2a4aca1144394653269720ffbb5a325a77abd5fa
>> > ("powerpc/mm: Split low level tlb invalidate for nohash processors").
>> > Reverting just that commit was too difficult, so I have reverted the
>> > powerpc tree for today.
>>
>> You can't revert that without reverting my whole series.
>
>I know that ... I tried.
>
>> Adding a #include ../mm/mmu_decl.h to the kvm code should fix it for
>> now.
>>
>> I need to talk to hollis about the right way to do that stuff in
>> the long run but it might be it... those _tlbil things are low level
>> stuff that aren't supposed to be used by the outside world which is
>> why I moved the declarations there, but KVM is also low level :-)
>
>So, why is this series in powerpc/next at all if some of the modified
>files haven't even been compiled? A simple ppc44x_defconfig build of the
>powerpc/next tree fails - which I would have thought would be part of the
>testing since KVM is only implemented for 44x on powerpc.
Well, they were, and then they weren't. I tested this series starting
with the ppc44x_defconfig. However, I was incrementally compiling them
and I also had the 16/64K pages patch applied and 64K enabled. That
resulted in a kernel that was too big for the wrapper, so I went in
and turned some stuff off to make the kernel smaller. That included
the KVM stuff. By the time I was done building and testing the whole
series, it had remained disabled.
That might sound like a cop-out, but it's what happend. I should have
done a simple build after I was done. Sorry Stephen.
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: testing (Was: Re: linux-next: scsi-post-merge tree build failure)
@ 2008-12-23 1:52 ` Josh Boyer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Josh Boyer @ 2008-12-23 1:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Blanchard, Hollis, linuxppc-dev, linux-next, Paul Mackerras
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 10:04:56AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>Hi Ben,
>
>On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 07:56:32 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 01:25 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> > Hi Paul, Ben,
>> >
>> > Today's linux-next build (powerpc ppc44x_config) failed like this:
>> >
>> > arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c: In function 'kvm_arch_vcpu_put':
>> > arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c:333: error: implicit declaration of function '_tlbil_all'
>> >
>> > Probably caused by commit 2a4aca1144394653269720ffbb5a325a77abd5fa
>> > ("powerpc/mm: Split low level tlb invalidate for nohash processors").
>> > Reverting just that commit was too difficult, so I have reverted the
>> > powerpc tree for today.
>>
>> You can't revert that without reverting my whole series.
>
>I know that ... I tried.
>
>> Adding a #include ../mm/mmu_decl.h to the kvm code should fix it for
>> now.
>>
>> I need to talk to hollis about the right way to do that stuff in
>> the long run but it might be it... those _tlbil things are low level
>> stuff that aren't supposed to be used by the outside world which is
>> why I moved the declarations there, but KVM is also low level :-)
>
>So, why is this series in powerpc/next at all if some of the modified
>files haven't even been compiled? A simple ppc44x_defconfig build of the
>powerpc/next tree fails - which I would have thought would be part of the
>testing since KVM is only implemented for 44x on powerpc.
Well, they were, and then they weren't. I tested this series starting
with the ppc44x_defconfig. However, I was incrementally compiling them
and I also had the 16/64K pages patch applied and 64K enabled. That
resulted in a kernel that was too big for the wrapper, so I went in
and turned some stuff off to make the kernel smaller. That included
the KVM stuff. By the time I was done building and testing the whole
series, it had remained disabled.
That might sound like a cop-out, but it's what happend. I should have
done a simple build after I was done. Sorry Stephen.
josh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread