From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] hugetlb: add per node hstate attributes Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:12:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20090826101202.GE10955@csn.ul.ie> References: <20090824192437.10317.77172.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090824192902.10317.94512.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090825133516.GE21335@csn.ul.ie> <1251233380.16229.3.camel@useless.americas.hpqcorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1251233380.16229.3.camel@useless.americas.hpqcorp.net> Sender: linux-numa-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Lee Schermerhorn Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Nishanth Aravamudan , David Rientjes , Adam Litke , Andy Whitcroft , eric.whitney@hp.com On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 04:49:40PM -0400, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 14:35 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 03:29:02PM -0400, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > > > > > > > > Index: linux-2.6.31-rc6-mmotm-090820-1918/include/linux/node.h > > > =================================================================== > > > --- linux-2.6.31-rc6-mmotm-090820-1918.orig/include/linux/node.h 2009-08-24 12:12:44.000000000 -0400 > > > +++ linux-2.6.31-rc6-mmotm-090820-1918/include/linux/node.h 2009-08-24 12:12:56.000000000 -0400 > > > @@ -21,9 +21,12 @@ > > > > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > > > > > Is this header inclusion necessary? It does not appear to be required by > > the structure modification (which is iffy in itself as discussed in the > > earlier mail) and it breaks build on x86-64. > > Hi, Mel: > > I recall that it is necessary to build. You can try w/o it. > I did, it appeared to work but I didn't dig deep as to why. > > > > CC arch/x86/kernel/setup_percpu.o > > In file included from include/linux/pagemap.h:10, > > from include/linux/mempolicy.h:62, > > from include/linux/hugetlb.h:8, > > from include/linux/node.h:24, > > from include/linux/cpu.h:23, > > from /usr/local/autobench/var/tmp/build/arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h:5, > > from arch/x86/kernel/setup_percpu.c:19: > > include/linux/highmem.h:53: error: static declaration of kmap follows non-static declaration > > /usr/local/autobench/var/tmp/build/arch/x86/include/asm/highmem.h:60: error: previous declaration of kmap was here > > include/linux/highmem.h:59: error: static declaration of kunmap follows non-static declaration > > /usr/local/autobench/var/tmp/build/arch/x86/include/asm/highmem.h:61: error: previous declaration of kunmap was here > > include/linux/highmem.h:63: error: static declaration of kmap_atomic follows non-static declaration > > /usr/local/autobench/var/tmp/build/arch/x86/include/asm/highmem.h:63: error: previous declaration of kmap_atomic was here > > make[2]: *** [arch/x86/kernel/setup_percpu.o] Error 1 > > make[1]: *** [arch/x86/kernel] Error 2 > > I saw this. I've been testing on x86_64. I *thought* that it only > started showing up in a recent mmotm from changes in the linux-next > patch--e.g., a failure to set ARCH_HAS_KMAP or to handle appropriately > !ARCH_HAS_KMAP in highmem.h But maybe that was coincidental with my > adding the include. > Maybe we were looking at different mmotm's -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab