Hi all,
After merging the mm-hotfixes tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
mm/ksm.c: In function 'ksm_might_need_to_copy':
mm/ksm.c:2605:21: error: implicit declaration of function 'copy_mc_user_highpage'; did you mean 'copy_user_highpage'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
2605 | if (copy_mc_user_highpage(new_page, page, address, vma)) {
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| copy_user_highpage
Caused by commit
b7edf4b1cdb1 ("mm: hwpoison: support recovery from ksm_might_need_to_copy()")
I have reverted that commit for today.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Hi, this patch relays on Tony Luck's Patch series "Copy-on-write poison
recovery".[1]
and tested ppc64_defconfig based on next-20221208, it's no build failure
I think it is not very hotfix, also will send v3 to address some comments
we could adjust the patch order in mm tree, thanks.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
On 2022/12/13 6:30, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the mm-hotfixes tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> mm/ksm.c: In function 'ksm_might_need_to_copy':
> mm/ksm.c:2605:21: error: implicit declaration of function 'copy_mc_user_highpage'; did you mean 'copy_user_highpage'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> 2605 | if (copy_mc_user_highpage(new_page, page, address, vma)) {
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> | copy_user_highpage
>
> Caused by commit
>
> b7edf4b1cdb1 ("mm: hwpoison: support recovery from ksm_might_need_to_copy()")
>
> I have reverted that commit for today.
>
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 09:34:24 +0800 Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, this patch relays on Tony Luck's Patch series "Copy-on-write poison
> recovery".[1]
> and tested ppc64_defconfig based on next-20221208, it's no build failure
I reordered these a couple of days ago, not sure how Stephen got a hold
of this tree - perhaps I wasn't pushy enough.
Stephen, quoting the mm-everything tag would be helpful, but rarely
useful so only if you're feeling bored ;)
> I think it is not very hotfix, also will send v3 to address some comments
> we could adjust the patch order in mm tree, thanks.
This patch is still in mm-unstable so updates won't be a problem.
Soon, please.
Hi Andrew,
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 18:23:04 -0800 Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 09:34:24 +0800 Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi, this patch relays on Tony Luck's Patch series "Copy-on-write poison
> > recovery".[1]
> > and tested ppc64_defconfig based on next-20221208, it's no build failure
>
> I reordered these a couple of days ago, not sure how Stephen got a hold
> of this tree - perhaps I wasn't pushy enough.
Probably, its just what I got when I fetched your branches this morning
(my time).
> Stephen, quoting the mm-everything tag would be helpful, but rarely
> useful so only if you're feeling bored ;)
OK, I will try to remember.
Part of the problem (for me) is that you sometimes update all your
branches in the middle of my day (I am not asking you to stop doing
that - I can cope), so the mm-hotifxes that I have merged early on does
not match the new mm-hotfixes-* branches that get merged as part of mm
(mm-everything) later in the day. This occasionally causes conflicts,
but they are invariably trivial and fixed by using the versions of
files from the new branches. I am wondering if maybe I should merge
mm-everything early (but after I have merged and tested all the -fixes
branches) to narrow the race condition :-)
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On 2022/12/13 10:23, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 09:34:24 +0800 Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi, this patch relays on Tony Luck's Patch series "Copy-on-write poison
>> recovery".[1]
>> and tested ppc64_defconfig based on next-20221208, it's no build failure
...
>> I think it is not very hotfix, also will send v3 to address some comments
>> we could adjust the patch order in mm tree, thanks.
> This patch is still in mm-unstable so updates won't be a problem.
> Soon, please.
Done, thanks.
>