Re: [PATCH] hexagon: Fix build failures in linux-next

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On 12/09/2014 04:25 PM, rkuo wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 02:21:45PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> hexagon:defconfig fails to build in linux-next since commit 332fd7c4fef5
>> ("genirq: Generic chip: Change irq_reg_{readl,writel} arguments").
>>
>> The primary build failure is
>>
>> arch/hexagon/include/asm/cacheflush.h: In function 'copy_to_user_page':
>> arch/hexagon/include/asm/cacheflush.h:89:22: error: 'VM_EXEC' undeclared
>>
>> This is the result of including of <linux/io.h> from <linux/irq.h>,
>> which is now necessary due to the use of readl and writel from irq.h.
>> This causes recursive inclusions in hexagon code; cacheflush.h is included
>> from mm.h prior to the definition of VM_EXEC.
>>
>> Fix the problem by moving copy_to_user_page from the hexagon include file to
>> arch/hexagon/mm/cache.c, similar to other architectures. After this change,
>> several redefinitions of readl and writel are reported. Those are caused
>> by recursive inclusions of io.h and asm/cacheflush.h. Fix those problems by
>> reducing the number of files included from those files. Also, it was necessary
>> to stop including asm-generic/cacheflush.h from asm/cacheflush.h. Instead,
>> functionality originally provided by asm-generic/cacheflush.h is now coded
>> in asm/cacheflush.h directly.
>>
>> Cc: Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>> ---
>> Compile tested only. Applies to linux-next as well as mainline.
>>
>>   arch/hexagon/include/asm/cacheflush.h | 36 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>   arch/hexagon/include/asm/io.h         |  5 -----
>>   arch/hexagon/kernel/setup.c           |  1 +
>>   arch/hexagon/mm/cache.c               | 10 ++++++++++
>>   arch/hexagon/mm/ioremap.c             |  1 +
>>   5 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>
>
> Thanks for the cleanup; tested working on hardware.
>
> I'm fine taking this into my tree, or it can go via another tree if more
> expedient.
>
Hi Richard,

Your tree should be fine as long as you plan to push your changes to Linus
during the current release cycle.

Thanks,
Guenter