On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 04:36:13PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> ERROR: modpost: "rcu_read_lock_longwait_held" [kernel/rcu/rcutorture.ko]
> undefined!
> ERROR: modpost: "rcu_read_unl
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
ERROR: modpost: "rcu_read_lock_longwait_held" [kernel/rcu/rcutorture.ko]
undefined!
ERROR: modpost: "rcu_read_unlock_longwait" [kernel/rcu/rcutorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: modpost: "rcu_read_lock
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 11:37:36AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/arm/mach-imx/cpuidle-imx6q.c: In function 'imx6q_enter_wait':
> arch/arm/mach-imx/cpuidle-imx6q.c:32:7: error:
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
arch/arm/mach-imx/cpuidle-imx6q.c: In function 'imx6q_enter_wait':
arch/arm/mach-imx/cpuidle-imx6q.c:32:7: error: implicit declaration of function
'need_resched'; did you mean 'tif_need_resche
Hi Paul,
On Sun, 6 Dec 2020 20:48:41 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:39:20AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:20:32 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Does the following patch fix things? (Sigh. It won't a
On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 08:39:20AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:20:32 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney"
> wrote:
> >
> > Does the following patch fix things? (Sigh. It won't apply on the
> > rcu/next that you used. Or even on this moment's dev branch. I will
> >
Hi Paul,
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 11:20:32 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
>
> Does the following patch fix things? (Sigh. It won't apply on the
> rcu/next that you used. Or even on this moment's dev branch. I will
> fold it in with attribution and update. But just to show you what my
> thought is
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 07:25:26PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (sparc defconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> mm/slab_common.o: In function `kmem_last_alloc':
> slab_common.c:(.text+0xc4): undefined reference to `kmem_cache_last_all
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (sparc defconfig)
failed like this:
mm/slab_common.o: In function `kmem_last_alloc':
slab_common.c:(.text+0xc4): undefined reference to `kmem_cache_last_alloc'
Caused by commit
f7c3fb4fc476 ("mm: Add kmem_last_alloc() to return last
Hi Paul,
On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 15:01:45 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 03:19:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > In file included from ker
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 03:19:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from kernel/rcu/update.c:578:
> kernel/rcu/tasks.h:601:20: error: static declaration of
> 'show_
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
In file included from kernel/rcu/update.c:578:
kernel/rcu/tasks.h:601:20: error: static declaration of
'show_rcu_tasks_classic_gp_kthread' follows non-static declaration
601 | static inline
On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 03:38:30PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> ERROR: modpost: "resched_cpu" [kernel/scftorture.ko] undefined!
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 20c881d0592c ("scftorture
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
ERROR: modpost: "resched_cpu" [kernel/scftorture.ko] undefined!
Caused by commit
20c881d0592c ("scftorture: Add an alternative IPI vector")
I have reverted that commit for today.
--
Cheers,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 11:43:54AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> In file included from include/linux/kernel.h:15,
> from kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c:13:
> kernel/rcu/rcusca
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
In file included from include/linux/kernel.h:15,
from kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c:13:
kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c: In function 'rcu_scale_writer':
kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c:430:6: error: 'perf_ty
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 12:57:53PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> kernel/rcu/tree.c: In function 'rcu_dynticks_eqs_enter':
> kernel/rcu/tree.c:251:8: error: implicit declaration of
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
kernel/rcu/tree.c: In function 'rcu_dynticks_eqs_enter':
kernel/rcu/tree.c:251:8: error: implicit declaration of function
'arch_atomic_add_return'; did you mean 'atomic_add_return'?
[-Werror
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 09:33:59AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:05:01PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powercp
> > allyesconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > ld: kernel/rcu/refperf.o:(.discard+0x
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 07:05:01PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powercp
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> ld: kernel/rcu/refperf.o:(.discard+0x0): multiple definition of
> `__pcpu_unique_srcu_ctl_perf_srcu_data'; kernel/rc
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powercp
allyesconfig) failed like this:
ld: kernel/rcu/refperf.o:(.discard+0x0): multiple definition of
`__pcpu_unique_srcu_ctl_perf_srcu_data'; kernel/rcu/rcuperf.o:(.discard+0x0):
first defined here
Caused by commit
786a2549774
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 05:57:32PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> drivers/base/core.c: In function 'device_links_read_lock_held':
> drivers/base/core.c:106:9: error: implicit declarati
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 03:25:11PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:19:34 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
> wrote:
> >
> > Huh. "It has been building fine for me." I added
> >
> > #include
> > #include
> >
> > to include/linux/rcu_segcblist.h, which hop
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
failed like this:
drivers/base/core.c: In function 'device_links_read_lock_held':
drivers/base/core.c:106:9: error: implicit declaration of function
'lock_is_held'; did you mean 'lockref_get'?
[-Werror=implicit-f
Hi Paul,
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 09:19:34 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> Huh. "It has been building fine for me." I added
>
> #include
> #include
>
> to include/linux/rcu_segcblist.h, which hopefully fixes it at your end.
That did not work as I got a lot of errors from
includ
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 04:12:36PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c: In function 'xen_pv_play_dead':
> arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c:439:2: error: implicit declaration of f
Hi all,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c: In function 'xen_pv_play_dead':
arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c:439:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'tick_nohz_idle_stop_tick_protected'; did you mean 'tick_nohz_idle_stop
On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 02:50:45PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> ERROR: "rcu_cpu_stall_suppress" [kernel/rcu/rcutorture.ko] undefined!
> ERROR: "rcu_cpu_stall_suppress" [kernel/rcu/r
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
ERROR: "rcu_cpu_stall_suppress" [kernel/rcu/rcutorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "rcu_cpu_stall_suppress" [kernel/rcu/rcuperf.ko] undefined!
Caused by commit
909bd6e3d9e7 ("rcu: Suppress RCU CPU
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:25:48PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/arm/kernel/asm-offsets.c:14:0:
> include/linux/sched.h: In function 'membarrier_sched_o
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/arm/kernel/asm-offsets.c:14:0:
include/linux/sched.h: In function 'membarrier_sched_out':
include/linux/sched.h:1680:3: error: implicit declaration of function
'syn
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 04:41:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:14:34AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:54:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:43:52PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > Looks like I n
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 07:39:17AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:14:34AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:54:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:43:52PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > Looks like I
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:14:34AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:54:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:43:52PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Looks like I need to rebase my patch on top of a9668cd6ee28, and
> > than put an smp_mb_
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:14:34AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:54:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:43:52PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > Looks like I need to rebase my patch on top of a9668cd6ee28, and
> > than put an smp_mb_
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:54:53PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:43:52PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Looks like I need to rebase my patch on top of a9668cd6ee28, and
> than put an smp_mb__after_spinlock() between the lock and the unlock.
>
> Peter, any objecti
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 02:43:52PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> kernel/sched/core.c: In function 'do_task_dead':
> kernel/sched/core.c:3385:2: error: implicit declaration of func
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
kernel/sched/core.c: In function 'do_task_dead':
kernel/sched/core.c:3385:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'smp_mb__before_spinlock' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
smp_mb
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 02:10:26PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
>
> > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 04:02:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >> Hi Paul,
> >>
> >> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (bfin
> >> BF526-EZBRD_defconfig and several other b
"Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 04:02:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (bfin
>> BF526-EZBRD_defconfig and several other bfin configs) failed like this:
>>
>> In file included from include/linux/srcu.h
Hi Joe,
On Mon, 29 May 2017 19:20:25 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2017-05-29 at 19:14 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 06:54:26PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 11:40 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > Hi Paul,
> > > >
> > > > >
On Mon, 2017-05-29 at 19:14 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 06:54:26PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 11:40 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > >
> > > > On Mon, 29 May 2017 14:15:05 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> >
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 06:54:26PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 11:40 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > > On Mon, 29 May 2017 14:15:05 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Anyone see any other options?
>
> My preferred option would be removin
On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 11:40 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> > On Mon, 29 May 2017 14:15:05 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
> > wrote:
> >
> > Anyone see any other options?
My preferred option would be removing pr_fmt
and adding a couple new macros.
---
arch/blackfin/kernel/module.c | 3
Hi Paul,
On Mon, 29 May 2017 14:15:05 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> Anyone see any other options?
I will add the following to linux-next today. If the Blackfin guys
agree (or come up with something better), you should get their acks and
then add it to your tree.
From: Stephen Rothwell
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 04:02:09PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (bfin
> BF526-EZBRD_defconfig and several other bfin configs) failed like this:
>
> In file included from include/linux/srcu.h:60:0,
> from includ
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (bfin
BF526-EZBRD_defconfig and several other bfin configs) failed like this:
In file included from include/linux/srcu.h:60:0,
from include/linux/notifier.h:15,
from include/linux/memory_hotplug.h:6,
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 03:36:47PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> [Also reported by Michael elsewhere]
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> pseries_le_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S: Assembler messages:
> arc
Hi Paul,
[Also reported by Michael elsewhere]
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
pseries_le_defconfig) failed like this:
arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S: Assembler messages:
arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S:587: Error: operand out of range
(0x00
Hi Paul,
On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 21:06:20 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> Or at least broken in a more subtle and creative way. ;-)
What I live for :-)
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:50:16PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c: In function 'rcu_torture_stats_print':
> kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c:1369:3: error: implicit dec
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c: In function 'rcu_torture_stats_print':
kernel/rcu/rcutorture.c:1369:3: error: implicit declaration of function
'srcutorture_get_gp_data' [-Werror=implicit-function-decla
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 12:16:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:43:24 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:37:48 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I chickened out on that commit for this merge window, so it will co
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 11:13:38AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 12:16:45PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > In file included from include/linux/reso
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 12:16:45PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> In file included from include/linux/resource_ext.h:19:0,
> from include/linux/pci.h:32,
>
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 12:16:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:43:24 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:37:48 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I chickened out on that commit for this merge window, so it will co
Hi Paul,
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:43:24 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:37:48 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney"
> wrote:
> >
> > I chickened out on that commit for this merge window, so it will come
> > back at -rc1. But I will cover that when I rebase to -rc1.
>
> OK, thanks
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
In file included from include/linux/resource_ext.h:19:0,
from include/linux/pci.h:32,
from include/drm/drmP.h:50,
from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915
Hi Paul,
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 20:37:48 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> I chickened out on that commit for this merge window, so it will come
> back at -rc1. But I will cover that when I rebase to -rc1.
OK, thanks.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 01:21:33PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:54:37 -0800 Paul McKenney wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Stephen Rothwell
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 a
Hi Paul,
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 13:54:37 -0800 Paul McKenney wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > net/smc/af_smc.c:102:16: error: 'SLAB_DES
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> net/smc/af_smc.c:102:16: error: 'SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU' undeclared here (not in
> a function)
> .slab_flags = SLAB_DESTROY_BY_
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
net/smc/af_smc.c:102:16: error: 'SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU' undeclared here (not in a
function)
.slab_flags = SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU,
^
Caused by commit
c7a545924ca1 ("mm: Rename SL
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 02:37:36PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c: In function 'vmx_init':
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11026:2: error: function '_r_a_p__v' is initialized
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c: In function 'vmx_init':
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11026:2: error: function '_r_a_p__v' is initialized like a
variable
rcu_assign_pointer(crash_vmclear_loaded_vmcss,
^
In file in
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:55:51PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> In file included from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock_types.h:18:0,
> from /home/sfr/next
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
In file included from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock_types.h:18:0,
from /home/sfr/next/next/include/linux/spinlock.h:81,
from /home/sfr/next/next/ker
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 09:29:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() n
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> > > exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:40:51PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> > exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building modules.
> > This is 04be76a9b067 (lo
On Tue, 2015-09-01 at 22:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Davidlohr, the error is due to sched_setscheduler_nocheck() not being
> exported, so that Stephen gets this failure when building modules.
> This is 04be76a9b067 (locktorture: Support rtmutex torturing) in -rcu.
>
> Thoughts?
Right, the
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 01:58:00PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 00:49:46 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmo
Hi Paul,
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015 00:49:46 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck" [kerne
On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 01:50:06PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
> ERROR: "percpu_down_write" [kernel/l
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
failed like this:
ERROR: "sched_setscheduler_nocheck" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "percpu_down_write" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "percpu_up_write" [kernel/locking/lockt
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
> > > patch
> > > that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will al
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 09:51:31PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
> > patch
> > that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will also queue
> > a
> > revert of the patch be
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> And here is a prototype patch, which I intend to merge with the existing
> patch
> that renames rcu_lockdep_assert() to RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(). I will also queue a
> revert of the patch below for 4.4.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:35:28AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:40:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > Hi Paul,
> > > >
> > > > After merging the rcu t
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:40:46PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
* Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> > multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
> > kernel/notifier.c:547:
Hi Paul,
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:51:38 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney"
wrote:
>
> Thank you in both cases! I suspect that more will follow, so is there
> something I can do to make this easier? (Hard for me to patch stuff
> that is not yet in the tree...)
No, that is what I am here for. But it would
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:14:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
> multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
> kernel/notifier.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function
>
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (arm
multi_v7_defconfig) failed like this:
kernel/notifier.c: In function 'notify_die':
kernel/notifier.c:547:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'rcu_lockdep_assert' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
rcu_lockdep_assert
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:34:05PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > >
> > > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
> > > failed like this:
> > >
* Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
> > init/main.c:387:2: error: implici
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:39:17PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
> init/main.c:387:2: error: implicit declaration of function
> 'smpboot_thread
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allnoconfig)
failed like this:
init/main.c: In function 'rest_init':
init/main.c:387:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'smpboot_thread_init' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
smpboot_thread_init();
^
Cause
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 01:18:56PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/x86/xen/smp.c: In function 'xen_cpu_up':
> arch/x86/xen/smp.c:460:6: error: 'err' undeclared (first use in this
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:
arch/x86/xen/smp.c: In function 'xen_cpu_up':
arch/x86/xen/smp.c:460:6: error: 'err' undeclared (first use in this function)
if (err)
^
Caused by commit b92c23b083d6 ("x86: Use common
ou
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 12:20:50PM -0500, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
> >> "select SRCU" to "config PPC" in arch/p
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
>> "select SRCU" to "config PPC" in arch/powerpc/Kconfig. Are you able
>> to cross-build powerpc?
>>
>
> ppc 32
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Pranith, if Stephen has CONFIG_KVM=n, it might be best to move the
> "select SRCU" to "config PPC" in arch/powerpc/Kconfig. Are you able
> to cross-build powerpc?
>
ppc 32 seems fine without selecting srcu unconditionally. So I added
thi
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 06:51:20PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
> from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 05:12:15PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
> from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:03:57AM -0500, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On 12/10/2014 03:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> > allnoconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h
On 12/10/2014 03:09 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
> from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
> include/l
Hi Paul,
After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
allnoconfig) failed like this:
In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_ppc.h:30:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:68:
include/linux/kvm_host.h:366:21: error: field 'srcu' has incomplete type
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
