From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Duyck Subject: Re: igbvf: add new driver to support 82576 virtual functions Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:10:48 -0700 Message-ID: <49CA5788.2000402@intel.com> References: <20090324.233843.61607506.davem@davemloft.net> <9929d2390903250145q2aae3046wb378d190576642c7@mail.gmail.com> <9929d2390903250203u42b50b54j2db3464967d48702@mail.gmail.com> <20090325094742.GA7760@yzhao-otc.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" , David Miller , Matthew Wilcox , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: "Zhao, Yu" Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:14690 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759613AbZCYQLI (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:11:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090325094742.GA7760@yzhao-otc.sh.intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Zhao, Yu wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 05:03:29PM +0800, Kirsher, Jeffrey T wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Jeff Kirsher >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:38 PM, David Miller wrote: >>>> This breaks the build: >>>> >>>> drivers/net/igbvf/ethtool.c: In function 'igbvf_set_ringparam': >>>> drivers/net/igbvf/ethtool.c:299: error: implicit declaration of function 'vmalloc' >>>> drivers/net/igbvf/ethtool.c:299: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast >>>> drivers/net/igbvf/ethtool.c:346: error: implicit declaration of function 'vfree' >>>> -- >>> Sorry Dave, I thought this was called out earlier, but I see it was >>> not. The igbvf driver requires the following patches applied to your >>> tree to have them compile. Last I heard, these SR-IOV patches were >>> accepted for 2.6.30, in the PCI tree. >>> >>> Yu, can you confirm that these patches have been accepted for 2.6.30? >>> >>> Summary: >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751955907397&w=2 >>> Patches: >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751956107417&w=2 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751956207423&w=2 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751981407629&w=2 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751981507632&w=2 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751981707644&w=2 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751981607635&w=2 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751981607638&w=2 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123751981707641&w=2 >> I confirmed that Jesse Barnes has these SR-IOV patches queued up for 2.6.30. >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123757169806111&w=2 > > Yes, it's in Jesse's linux-next branch: > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jbarnes/pci-2.6.git;a=shortlog;h=linux-next > > Thanks, > Yu The problem isn't the SR-IOV patches it is a difference in architectures. The x86/x86_64 architecture lets you be a bit more sloppy when it comes to including vmalloc. I've seen it in the past with igb, and I suspect that is why we didn't catch this in testing. We just need to add a #include of vmalloc.h in ethtool.c and the issue should be fixed. Thanks, Alex