* Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) [not found] <20080613232214.394fd6fd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> @ 2008-06-13 17:13 ` Randy Dunlap 2008-06-13 22:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2008-06-13 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linux-next, LKML, jeremy, chrisw, virtualization next-20080613 on x86_32 has lots of xen build errors like this: linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c: In function 'drop_mm_ref': linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:759: error: implicit declaration of function 'xen_smp_call_function_mask' make[2]: *** [arch/x86/xen/mmu.o] Error 1 --- ~Randy '"Daemon' is an old piece of jargon from the UNIX operating system, where it referred to a piece of low-level utility software, a fundamental part of the operating system." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) 2008-06-13 17:13 ` linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) Randy Dunlap @ 2008-06-13 22:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge 2008-06-14 20:31 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2008-06-13 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Randy Dunlap Cc: Stephen Rothwell, chrisw, virtualization, linux-next, LKML, Jens Axboe Randy Dunlap wrote: > next-20080613 on x86_32 has lots of xen build errors like this: > > linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c: In function 'drop_mm_ref': > linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:759: error: implicit declaration of function 'xen_smp_call_function_mask' > make[2]: *** [arch/x86/xen/mmu.o] Error 1 > > Ooh, first time I've seen that. Sounds like Jens' patches are missing the appropriate update there (though it's certainly had it in the past). J ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) 2008-06-13 22:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2008-06-14 20:31 ` Jens Axboe 2008-06-14 23:13 ` Randy Dunlap 2008-06-15 6:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2008-06-14 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Randy Dunlap, Stephen Rothwell, chrisw, virtualization, linux-next, LKML On Fri, Jun 13 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Randy Dunlap wrote: > >next-20080613 on x86_32 has lots of xen build errors like this: > > > >linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c: In function 'drop_mm_ref': > >linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:759: error: implicit declaration of > >function 'xen_smp_call_function_mask' > >make[2]: *** [arch/x86/xen/mmu.o] Error 1 > > > > > > Ooh, first time I've seen that. Sounds like Jens' patches are missing > the appropriate update there (though it's certainly had it in the past). Hmm, will this work or do we need to force xen smp_ops for this one? I wonder if this is new code and was missed, or what happened in this case. diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c index 3525ef5..8baef77 100644 --- a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c +++ b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) } if (!cpus_empty(mask)) - xen_smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); + smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); } #else static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) 2008-06-14 20:31 ` Jens Axboe @ 2008-06-14 23:13 ` Randy Dunlap 2008-06-15 6:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2008-06-14 23:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge, Stephen Rothwell, chrisw, virtualization, linux-next, LKML On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 22:31:10 +0200 Jens Axboe wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > Randy Dunlap wrote: > > >next-20080613 on x86_32 has lots of xen build errors like this: > > > > > >linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c: In function 'drop_mm_ref': > > >linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:759: error: implicit declaration of > > >function 'xen_smp_call_function_mask' > > >make[2]: *** [arch/x86/xen/mmu.o] Error 1 > > > > > > > > > > Ooh, first time I've seen that. Sounds like Jens' patches are missing > > the appropriate update there (though it's certainly had it in the past). > > Hmm, will this work or do we need to force xen smp_ops for this one? I > wonder if this is new code and was missed, or what happened in this > case. Builds cleanly. Thanks. > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > index 3525ef5..8baef77 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) > } > > if (!cpus_empty(mask)) > - xen_smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); > + smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); > } > #else > static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) --- ~Randy '"Daemon' is an old piece of jargon from the UNIX operating system, where it referred to a piece of low-level utility software, a fundamental part of the operating system." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) 2008-06-14 20:31 ` Jens Axboe 2008-06-14 23:13 ` Randy Dunlap @ 2008-06-15 6:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge 2008-06-16 19:30 ` Jens Axboe 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2008-06-15 6:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: Randy Dunlap, Stephen Rothwell, chrisw, virtualization, linux-next, LKML Jens Axboe wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > >> Randy Dunlap wrote: >> >>> next-20080613 on x86_32 has lots of xen build errors like this: >>> >>> linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c: In function 'drop_mm_ref': >>> linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:759: error: implicit declaration of >>> function 'xen_smp_call_function_mask' >>> make[2]: *** [arch/x86/xen/mmu.o] Error 1 >>> >>> >>> >> Ooh, first time I've seen that. Sounds like Jens' patches are missing >> the appropriate update there (though it's certainly had it in the past). >> > > Hmm, will this work or do we need to force xen smp_ops for this one? I > wonder if this is new code and was missed, or what happened in this > case. > Yes, using smp_call_function_mask is perfectly OK. The old code was just a micro-optimisation. I'm pretty sure this chunk was in one of your patchsets (or perhaps I sent it to you at some point). > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > index 3525ef5..8baef77 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > @@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) > } > > if (!cpus_empty(mask)) > - xen_smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); > + smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); > } > #else > static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) > > Acked-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> J ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) 2008-06-15 6:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2008-06-16 19:30 ` Jens Axboe 2008-06-16 20:40 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2008-06-16 19:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Randy Dunlap, Stephen Rothwell, chrisw, virtualization, linux-next, LKML On Sun, Jun 15 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Jens Axboe wrote: > >On Fri, Jun 13 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > > >>Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> > >>>next-20080613 on x86_32 has lots of xen build errors like this: > >>> > >>>linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c: In function 'drop_mm_ref': > >>>linux-next-20080613/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:759: error: implicit declaration > >>>of function 'xen_smp_call_function_mask' > >>>make[2]: *** [arch/x86/xen/mmu.o] Error 1 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>Ooh, first time I've seen that. Sounds like Jens' patches are missing > >>the appropriate update there (though it's certainly had it in the past). > >> > > > >Hmm, will this work or do we need to force xen smp_ops for this one? I > >wonder if this is new code and was missed, or what happened in this > >case. > > > > Yes, using smp_call_function_mask is perfectly OK. The old code was > just a micro-optimisation. I'm pretty sure this chunk was in one of > your patchsets (or perhaps I sent it to you at some point). Hmm yes, not sure myself to be honest, but I think you are right. > >diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > >index 3525ef5..8baef77 100644 > >--- a/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > >+++ b/arch/x86/xen/mmu.c > >@@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) > > } > > > > if (!cpus_empty(mask)) > >- xen_smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); > >+ smp_call_function_mask(mask, drop_other_mm_ref, mm, 1); > > } > > #else > > static void drop_mm_ref(struct mm_struct *mm) > > > > > > Acked-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> Thanks, I just folded it in with the existing patch to avoid breakage. That one doesn't have an ack from you though, so if you have done a full review of the x86 bits, I'd appreciate an ack on those from you :-) -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) 2008-06-16 19:30 ` Jens Axboe @ 2008-06-16 20:40 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge @ 2008-06-16 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe Cc: Randy Dunlap, Stephen Rothwell, chrisw, virtualization, linux-next, LKML Jens Axboe wrote: > Thanks, I just folded it in with the existing patch to avoid breakage. > That one doesn't have an ack from you though, so if you have done a full > review of the x86 bits, I'd appreciate an ack on those from you :-) > I've been testing it without problems, at least under Xen. Acked-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com> J ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-06-16 20:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20080613232214.394fd6fd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
2008-06-13 17:13 ` linux-next: Tree for June 13 (XEN) Randy Dunlap
2008-06-13 22:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-06-14 20:31 ` Jens Axboe
2008-06-14 23:13 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-06-15 6:11 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-06-16 19:30 ` Jens Axboe
2008-06-16 20:40 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
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).