Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > arch/x86_64/pci/built-in.o(.init.text+0xa88): In function > `pci_acpi_scan_root': > > : undefined reference to `pxm_to_node' > > make: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1 > > 09/08/05-06:52:31 Build the kernel. Failed rc = 2 > > 09/08/05-06:52:31 build: kernel build Failed rc = 1 > > 09/08/05-06:52:31 command complete: (2) rc=126 > > Failed and terminated the run > > I tried the config in my (non mm) tree and it compiled just fine.
You must have mucked it up. > Must be some bad interaction with another patch in -mm* or a bad > merge. Nope. > The original patch that introduces it is > ftp://ftp.firstfloor.org/pub/ak/x86_64/x86_64-2.6.13-1/patches/pci-pxm > > pxm_to_node for x86-64 is supposed to be declared in arch/x86_64/mm/srat.c pxm_to_node is *defined* in arch/x86_64/mm/srat.c, which is enabled by CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA. pxm_to_node is declared in include/asm-x86_64/numa.h pxm_to_node is referenced in arch/i386/pci/acpi.c, under CONFIG_NUMA. Consequently CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA=n, CONFIG_NUMA=y will fail to link. Also x86 compilation of arch/i386/pci/acpi.c with CONFIG_NUMA=y will generate an `implicit declaration of function' warning and will fail to link. Also, x86_64-srat-overlap-error.patch adds this forward decl in arch/x86_64/mm/srat.c: int node_to_pxm(int n); Please, either give it static scope or, if it really needs global scope (it doesn't), put the declaration in the right place? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
