From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Zi Yan" Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the akpm-current tree Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 07:30:07 -0400 Message-ID: <00BCCF64-C319-44F0-992B-7F78D4676B5E@cs.rutgers.edu> References: <20170801163904.7d49881a@canb.auug.org.au> <20170801205054.17c8579f@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_E24B9B8B-5478-4D62-8B88-3E4A25894F95_="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from mail-bl2nam02on0110.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.38.110]:36400 "EHLO NAM02-BL2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751166AbdHALaN (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Aug 2017 07:30:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170801205054.17c8579f@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 3156 and 4880). --=_MailMate_E24B9B8B-5478-4D62-8B88-3E4A25894F95_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Stephen, The warning after removing __pmd() is caused by a gcc bug: https://gcc.gn= u.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D53119 so (pmd_t) {0} causes warning in some GCC versions. __pmd() is defined in alpha, arm, arm64, frv, ia64, m32r, m68k, microblaz= e, mips, parisc, powerpc, s390, sh, sparc, tile, um, x86, and asm-generic, according to http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/ident/__pmd I am not sure about whether arc, blackfin, c6x, cris, h8300, hexagon, met= ag, mn10300, nios2, score, xtensa use __pmd() in asm-generic or not. I am looking for other workarounds for this warning now. =E2=80=94 Best Regards, Yan Zi On 1 Aug 2017, at 6:50, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 16:39:04 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >> After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (sparc defconfig= ) >> failed like this: >> >> In file included from mm/vmscan.c:55:0: >> include/linux/swapops.h: In function 'swp_entry_to_pmd': >> include/linux/swapops.h:226:9: error: implicit declaration of function= '__pmd' [-Werror=3Dimplicit-function-declaration] >> return __pmd(0); >> ^ >> include/linux/swapops.h:226:9: error: incompatible types when returnin= g type 'int' but 'pmd_t {aka struct }' was expected >> >> Caused by commit >> >> 9bb18490758c ("mm-thp-enable-thp-migration-in-generic-path-fix") >> >> It looks like sparc 32 bit has no __pmd() ... >> >> I have reverted that commit for today. > > OK, that is a pain as it causes many build warnings some of which are > treated as errors :-( (see e.g. > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fkissk= b.ellerman.id.au%2Fkisskb%2Fbuildresult%2F13112192%2F&data=3D02%7C01%7Czi= =2Eyan%40cs.rutgers.edu%7Cbf7a7ad57ad04505172f08d4d8cb31c5%7Cb92d2b234d35= 447093ff69aca6632ffe%7C1%7C0%7C636371814609835949&sdata=3DdiTid245prNY3Jy= 1pPEaL5q8dSBifFVzliKRq54fXhk%3D&reserved=3D0). So maybe > we need to fix sthe sparc32 build instead? Are there any other > architectures/platforms that do not define __pmd() ? > > -- = > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell --=_MailMate_E24B9B8B-5478-4D62-8B88-3E4A25894F95_= Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJZgGY/AAoJEEGLLxGcTqbM14IH/i0cYfKue27hDGYyON8LEIkI khELbzbu7zGXCeRcKdtyc6I+0MOfpd1rsumRE9CPeKo3PAp7bUERg8w5FbpdzYDZ X39PrxB5cK/9ARE4cDiuXTKdwrB893tC7vRMwBJ29MSXdf9tHuF4F5GuTzDY5NNf D6i+gGS42QETBrKowmqWTQ8K5+vya003v5QAvA4AEERMUaThFrzLsgjc1GRGvfVl Sg6rZRQkxSDYOzoBa3ejdT9ADo7t3bJaUpkmv1dLn7s13clhyUYF/7rnFBIijuyQ T/4tszLeBhWIsZsJtPnLLJRzVmZy//JyVRlrpktTrY6UIfjNdIFfGcIuZAY6KJs= =Q/SV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_MailMate_E24B9B8B-5478-4D62-8B88-3E4A25894F95_=--