On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:52:32 +0200 > Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote: > >> This reverts the earlier fix attempt and works around the problem >> by including both linux/mmu_context.h and asm/mmu_context.h from >> kernel/sched/core.c. This is not a good solution but seems less >> hacky than the alternatives. > > What about simply not compiling finish_arch_post_lock_switch() when > building modules? > > (untested, not compiled or anything) > > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> > --- > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/mmu_context.h > b/arch/arm/include/asm/mmu_context.h > index fa5b42d44985..3f22d1b6bac8 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mmu_context.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mmu_context.h > @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ static inline void check_and_switch_context(struct > mm_struct *mm, > cpu_switch_mm(mm->pgd, mm); > } > > +#ifndef MODULE > #define finish_arch_post_lock_switch \ > finish_arch_post_lock_switch > static inline void finish_arch_post_lock_switch(void) > @@ -87,6 +88,7 @@ static inline void finish_arch_post_lock_switch(void) > preempt_enable_no_resched(); > } > } > +#endif /* !MODULE */ > > #endif /* CONFIG_MMU */ >
Can someone in arm land ack this so Ingo can apply it? --Andy -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC
