* Re: next-20090216: slqb [not found] ` <20090217005539.GA6292@x200.localdomain> @ 2009-02-17 10:27 ` Nick Piggin 2009-02-17 11:31 ` Pekka Enberg 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Nick Piggin @ 2009-02-17 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexey Dobriyan; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel, linuxppc-dev On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 03:55:40AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > FYI, on powerpc-64-smp-n-debug-n: > > mm/slqb.c: In function '__slab_free': > mm/slqb.c:1648: error: implicit declaration of function 'slab_free_to_remote' > mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_open': > mm/slqb.c:2174: error: implicit declaration of function 'kmem_cache_dyn_array_free' > mm/slqb.c:2175: warning: label 'error_cpu_array' defined but not used > mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_destroy': > mm/slqb.c:2294: error: implicit declaration of function 'claim_remote_free_list' > mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_reap_percpu': > mm/slqb.c:2547: error: implicit declaration of function 'flush_remote_free_cache' > mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_init': > mm/slqb.c:2783: error: 'per_cpu__kmem_cpu_nodes' undeclared (first use in this function) > mm/slqb.c:2783: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once > mm/slqb.c:2783: error: for each function it appears in.) > mm/slqb.c:2784: error: 'kmem_cpu_cache' undeclared (first use in this function) Hmm, I guess this (SMP=n && NUMA=y) must be a valid config on ppc if SLQB is the only one tripping on it, so I'll look at code to fix tihs up. Thanks, Nick ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20090216: slqb 2009-02-17 10:27 ` next-20090216: slqb Nick Piggin @ 2009-02-17 11:31 ` Pekka Enberg 2009-02-17 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Pekka Enberg @ 2009-02-17 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nick Piggin Cc: linuxppc-dev, Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, Alexey Dobriyan, linux-kernel On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 03:55:40AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: >> FYI, on powerpc-64-smp-n-debug-n: >> >> mm/slqb.c: In function '__slab_free': >> mm/slqb.c:1648: error: implicit declaration of function 'slab_free_to_remote' >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_open': >> mm/slqb.c:2174: error: implicit declaration of function 'kmem_cache_dyn_array_free' >> mm/slqb.c:2175: warning: label 'error_cpu_array' defined but not used >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_destroy': >> mm/slqb.c:2294: error: implicit declaration of function 'claim_remote_free_list' >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_reap_percpu': >> mm/slqb.c:2547: error: implicit declaration of function 'flush_remote_free_cache' >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_init': >> mm/slqb.c:2783: error: 'per_cpu__kmem_cpu_nodes' undeclared (first use in this function) >> mm/slqb.c:2783: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once >> mm/slqb.c:2783: error: for each function it appears in.) >> mm/slqb.c:2784: error: 'kmem_cpu_cache' undeclared (first use in this function) On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote: > Hmm, I guess this (SMP=n && NUMA=y) must be a valid config on ppc if > SLQB is the only one tripping on it, so I'll look at code to fix tihs > up. It would be nice if one of the ppc devs confirmed this, though. Other architectures don't seem to support the combination. Pekka ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: next-20090216: slqb 2009-02-17 11:31 ` Pekka Enberg @ 2009-02-17 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Peter Zijlstra @ 2009-02-17 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Nick Piggin, Stephen Rothwell, linux-kernel, linuxppc-dev, linux-next, Alexey Dobriyan On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 13:31 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 03:55:40AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > >> FYI, on powerpc-64-smp-n-debug-n: > >> > >> mm/slqb.c: In function '__slab_free': > >> mm/slqb.c:1648: error: implicit declaration of function 'slab_free_to_remote' > >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_open': > >> mm/slqb.c:2174: error: implicit declaration of function 'kmem_cache_dyn_array_free' > >> mm/slqb.c:2175: warning: label 'error_cpu_array' defined but not used > >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_destroy': > >> mm/slqb.c:2294: error: implicit declaration of function 'claim_remote_free_list' > >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_reap_percpu': > >> mm/slqb.c:2547: error: implicit declaration of function 'flush_remote_free_cache' > >> mm/slqb.c: In function 'kmem_cache_init': > >> mm/slqb.c:2783: error: 'per_cpu__kmem_cpu_nodes' undeclared (first use in this function) > >> mm/slqb.c:2783: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once > >> mm/slqb.c:2783: error: for each function it appears in.) > >> mm/slqb.c:2784: error: 'kmem_cpu_cache' undeclared (first use in this function) > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote: > > Hmm, I guess this (SMP=n && NUMA=y) must be a valid config on ppc if > > SLQB is the only one tripping on it, so I'll look at code to fix tihs > > up. > > It would be nice if one of the ppc devs confirmed this, though. Other > architectures don't seem to support the combination. I get a strong sense of deja-vu Subject: next Feb 10: mm/slqb build break FWIW, I don't think NUMA without SMP makes any kind of sense and the arch Kconfig should be fixed. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-02-17 12:51 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20090216172016.f1d159a7.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
[not found] ` <20090217005539.GA6292@x200.localdomain>
2009-02-17 10:27 ` next-20090216: slqb Nick Piggin
2009-02-17 11:31 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-02-17 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).