From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sachin Sant Subject: Re: [-next Sept 9] S309 Build break (mm/percpu.c) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 11:39:33 +0530 Message-ID: <4C89CB9D.6010005@in.ibm.com> References: <4C88D48A.3070702@in.ibm.com> <4C88EE00.70004@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from e28smtp03.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.3]:59900 "EHLO e28smtp03.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750962Ab0IJGJh (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Sep 2010 02:09:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C88EE00.70004@kernel.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Tejun Heo Cc: "linux-next@vger.kernel.org" , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , linux-kernel Tejun Heo wrote: > Commit bbddff05 (percpu: use percpu allocator on UP too) incorrectly > excluded pcpu_build_alloc_info() on SMP configurations which use > generic setup_per_cpu_area() like s390. The config ifdefs are > becoming confusing. Fix and clean it up by, > > * Move pcpu_build_alloc_info() right on top of its two users - > pcpu_{embed|page}_first_chunk() which are already in CONFIG_SMP > block. > > * Define BUILD_{EMBED|PAGE}_FIRST_CHUNK which indicate whether each > first chunk function needs to be included and use them to control > inclusion of the three functions to reduce confusion. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo > Reported-by: Sachin Sant > --- > Can you please test this patch? > Tested the patch against yesterday's next release(20100909). Works fine. Thanks Tejun. Regards -Sachin -- --------------------------------- Sachin Sant IBM Linux Technology Center India Systems and Technology Labs Bangalore, India ---------------------------------