From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57BF4C10F29 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:20:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03E3820663 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:20:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=c-s.fr header.i=@c-s.fr header.b="edVSWYia" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 03E3820663 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=c-s.fr Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48hg0J4y2szDqkX for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 04:20:00 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=c-s.fr (client-ip=93.17.236.30; helo=pegase1.c-s.fr; envelope-from=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=c-s.fr Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=c-s.fr header.i=@c-s.fr header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=edVSWYia; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr (pegase1.c-s.fr [93.17.236.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48hfGY16MBzDqPl for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 03:47:15 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from localhost (mailhub1-int [192.168.12.234]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48hfGM5Cz9zB09ZX; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:47:07 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: localhost; dkim=pass reason="1024-bit key; insecure key" header.d=c-s.fr header.i=@c-s.fr header.b=edVSWYia; dkim-adsp=pass; dkim-atps=neutral X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at c-s.fr Received: from pegase1.c-s.fr ([192.168.12.234]) by localhost (pegase1.c-s.fr [192.168.12.234]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id njCKhkKL8GbJ; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:47:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [192.168.25.192]) by pegase1.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48hfGM48TszB09ZV; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:47:07 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=c-s.fr; s=mail; t=1584463627; bh=JsfnXC/cnJsuXWRqx1TwBBaG9YgLMK3pw2NWMP79MMg=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=edVSWYia3WgoAWxJueDngYrDM6YB8liD5IapHEPAvxvpuVIPS5fcq2U2XkF9/AnsU SMTVyae6LoLClyQAvXUQV8YRkcibhq/XcxkeVCCqWxMJmd8jbBS8OdA2B4LWUzYQVu 9t8KZ0sVM/a39S+fpyZhyPjU59kK0jfeK8/c+GHU= Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6F548B851; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:47:08 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at c-s.fr Received: from messagerie.si.c-s.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (messagerie.si.c-s.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 51wPl3YqcNGk; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:47:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.4.90] (unknown [192.168.4.90]) by messagerie.si.c-s.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8E9E8B846; Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:47:04 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Fix build failure with HUGETLB_PAGE but not HUGEBTLBFS To: Mike Kravetz , Baoquan He References: <7e8c3a3c9a587b9cd8a2f146df32a421b961f3a2.1584432148.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> <20200317082550.GA3375@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> <60117fd7-46ff-326b-34f1-0c7087111ca7@c-s.fr> From: Christophe Leroy Message-ID: Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 17:47:02 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Nick Piggin , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Adam Litke , Nishanth Aravamudan , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Le 17/03/2020 à 17:40, Mike Kravetz a écrit : > On 3/17/20 1:43 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> >> >> Le 17/03/2020 à 09:25, Baoquan He a écrit : >>> On 03/17/20 at 08:04am, Christophe Leroy wrote: >>>> When CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE is set but not CONFIG_HUGETLBFS, the >>>> following build failure is encoutered: >>> >>> From the definition of HUGETLB_PAGE, isn't it relying on HUGETLBFS? >>> I could misunderstand the def_bool, please correct me if I am wrong. >> >> AFAIU, it means that HUGETLBFS rely on HUGETLB_PAGE, by default HUGETLB_PAGE is not selected when HUGETLBFS is not. But it is still possible for an arch to select HUGETLB_PAGE without selecting HUGETLBFS when it uses huge pages for other purpose than hugetlb file system. >> > > Hi Christophe, > > Do you actually have a use case/example of using hugetlb pages without > hugetlbfs? I can understand that there are some use cases which never > use the filesystem interface. However, hugetlb support is so intertwined > with hugetlbfs, I am thinking there would be issues trying to use them > separately. I will look into this further. > Hi Mike, Series https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/list/?series=164620 And especially patch 39 to 41. Thanks Christophe