Hi all,
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 14:04:14 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from include/linux/ftrace.h:23,
> from include/linux/kvm_host.h:32,
>
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 at 05:02, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> This fix looks fine to me. How should we handle this when we send our pull
> requests to Linus? I may forgot about this issue, and it also matters who's
> tree goes first.
So just mention the issue in the pull request - preferably on both
sid
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 14:04:14 +1100
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from include/linux/ftrace.h:23,
> from include/linux/kvm_host.h:32,
>
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 11:36 AM Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 09:27:17 -0700 Mina Almasry wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/page-flags.h b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> > index 5769fe6e4950..ea4005d2d1a9 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/page-flags.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/page-f
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 9:13 AM LEROY Christophe
wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 13/09/2024 à 17:49, Jakub Kicinski a écrit :
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 08:34:26 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >>> The second "asm" above (CONFIG_PPC_KERNEL_PREFIXED is not set). I am
> >>> guessing by searching for "39" in net/core/
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:05:32 -0700 Mina Almasry wrote:
> Change, got NAKed:
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/zusq9bt9vg7o2...@casper.infradead.org/
Humpf.
> But AFAICT we don't really need to do this inside of mm, affecting
> things like compound_head. This equivalent change also makes the build
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 09:27:17 -0700 Mina Almasry wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/page-flags.h b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> index 5769fe6e4950..ea4005d2d1a9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/page-flags.h
> +++ b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> @@ -239,8 +239,8 @@ static inline unsigned long _compound_h
Le 13/09/2024 à 17:49, Jakub Kicinski a écrit :
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 08:34:26 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> The second "asm" above (CONFIG_PPC_KERNEL_PREFIXED is not set). I am
>>> guessing by searching for "39" in net/core/page_pool.s
>>>
>>> This is maybe called from page_pool_unref_netmem(
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 08:34:26 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > The second "asm" above (CONFIG_PPC_KERNEL_PREFIXED is not set). I am
> > guessing by searching for "39" in net/core/page_pool.s
> >
> > This is maybe called from page_pool_unref_netmem()
>
> Thanks! The compiler version helped, I can
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 20:41:38 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> I have bisected it (just using the net-next tree) to commit
>
> 8ab79ed50cf10f338465c296012500de1081646f is the first bad commit
> commit 8ab79ed50cf10f338465c296012500de1081646f
> Author: Mina Almasry
> Date: Tue Sep 10 17:14:49 2024
Le 09/09/2024 à 18:23, Masahiro Yamada a écrit :
On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 11:58 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Christophe,
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:22:26 +0200 Christophe Leroy
wrote:
Le 09/09/2024 à 12:09, Stephen Rothwell a écrit :
Hi all,
After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-ne
On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 11:58 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi Christophe,
>
> On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:22:26 +0200 Christophe Leroy
> wrote:
> >
> > Le 09/09/2024 à 12:09, Stephen Rothwell a écrit :
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > > p
Hi Christophe,
On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 16:22:26 +0200 Christophe Leroy
wrote:
>
> Le 09/09/2024 à 12:09, Stephen Rothwell a écrit :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc44x_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > make[3]: *** No rule to make targ
Le 09/09/2024 à 12:09, Stephen Rothwell a écrit :
Hi all,
After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc44x_defconfig) failed like this:
make[3]: *** No rule to make target 'arch/powerpc/boot/treeImage.ebony', needed
by 'arch/powerpc/boot/zImage'. Stop.
make[2]: ***
Andrew Morton writes:
> On Fri, 01 Dec 2023 09:39:20 +1100 Michael Ellerman
> wrote:
>
>> > I am still carrying this patch (it should probably go into the mm
>> > tree). Is someone going to pick it up (assuming it is correct)?
>>
>> I applied it to my next a few days ago, but I must have forgo
On Fri, 01 Dec 2023 09:39:20 +1100 Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > I am still carrying this patch (it should probably go into the mm
> > tree). Is someone going to pick it up (assuming it is correct)?
>
> I applied it to my next a few days ago, but I must have forgotten to
> push. It's in there now
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 14:48:52 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> Just cc'ing the PowerPC guys to see if my fix is sensible.
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 13:28:09 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc6
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 09:04:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c
> > > b/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c
> > > index be229290a6a7..3438ab72c346 100644
> > > --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c
> > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s
Hi all,
On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 14:48:52 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Just cc'ing the PowerPC guys to see if my fix is sensible.
>
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 13:28:09 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> > allnoconfig) failed li
Hi all,
Just cc'ing the PowerPC guys to see if my fix is sensible.
On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 13:28:09 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c:557:5: error: no previous pro
On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 09:00:43PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> Please leave this ^^^ comment, because the need for TRACE_DEFINE_ENUM to
> make enums work in tracepoints is not at all obvious.
>
> "order %u" to match the (non dev_t) style of the rest of the xfs
> tracepoints.
ACK, thanks.
And
Matthew Wilcox writes:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 09:55:37AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> In file included from include/trace/trace_events.h:27,
>> from include/trace/define_trace.h:102,
>> from fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h:4428,
>> from fs/xfs/xfs_trac
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 02:34:06AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:22:17AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Matthew,
> >
> > On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 02:11:44 +0100 Matthew Wilcox
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 09:55:37AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:22:17AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 02:11:44 +0100 Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 09:55:37AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > In file included from include/trace/trace_events.h:27,
> > >
Hi Matthew,
On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 02:11:44 +0100 Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 09:55:37AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > In file included from include/trace/trace_events.h:27,
> > from include/trace/define_trace.h:102,
> > from fs/xfs/xfs_tr
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 09:55:37AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> In file included from include/trace/trace_events.h:27,
> from include/trace/define_trace.h:102,
> from fs/xfs/xfs_trace.h:4428,
> from fs/xfs/xfs_trace.c:45:
> include/linux/pgtabl
On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:39:46PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the crypto tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> ld: warning: discarding dynamic section .glink
> ld: warning: discarding dynamic section .plt
> ld: linkage tab
Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 04:21:19PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc44x_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h:247,
> from arch/powerpc/include/asm/thread
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c: In function 'early_setup':
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c:400:34: error: 'struct thread_info' has no
> member named 'cp
Hi all,
On Mon, 5 Dec 2022 10:48:57 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> It could be (easily) argued that arch/powerpc/include/asm/cache.h should
> include linus/types.h, but it is also unusual to include an asm/... file
> before all the linux/... files.
Or maybe you should have included linux/cac
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c: In function 'text_area_cpu_up_mm':
> arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c:157:14: error: implicit declaration of
> function '
On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 11:26 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Though, I wonder if the powerpc tree should
> use mm_alloc() instead of copy_init_mm() as well? The tip tree
> commit
> says:
>
> Instead of duplicating init_mm, allocate a fresh mm. The
> advantage is
> that mm_alloc() has much
Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Sachin Sant writes:
> > Linux-next (5.19.0-rc8-next-20220728) fails to build on powerpc with
> > following error:
> >
> > ERROR: modpost: "memory_add_physaddr_to_nid" [drivers/cxl/cxl_pmem.ko]
> > undefined!
> > make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.modpost:128: modules-only.sy
> From 8ca5b098b6ff1048953be748dbffc987996e2605 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michael Ellerman
> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 16:13:55 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Export memory_add_physaddr_to_nid() for modules
>
> The cxl_pmem module wants to call memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(), so
> expor
Sachin Sant writes:
> Linux-next (5.19.0-rc8-next-20220728) fails to build on powerpc with
> following error:
>
> ERROR: modpost: "memory_add_physaddr_to_nid" [drivers/cxl/cxl_pmem.ko]
> undefined!
> make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.modpost:128: modules-only.symvers] Error 1
>
> The code in questio
Hi Linus,
On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 15:23:24 -0700 Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> Will apply that patch asap.
Thanks
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgp1yu3oqMq3e.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-#endif /* CONFIG_LIVEPATCH */
On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 3:23 PM Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> I even *looked* at that code when merging, and convinced myself I had
> gotten the #ifdef/#endif chain right. Apparently I can't count.
>
> What a maroon I am.
Oh, and I see why I screwed up: I even did a "
On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 3:01 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Building LInus' tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
Gaah.
I even *looked* at that code when merging, and convinced myself I had
gotten the #ifdef/#endif chain right. Apparently I can't count.
Wh
Linus Torvalds writes:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 7:08 PM Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> That patch works for me - for the ppc64_defconfig build at least.
>
> Yeah, I just tested the allmodconfig case too, although I suspect it's
> essentially the same wrt the boot *.S files, so it probably does
Linus Torvalds writes:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 7:08 PM Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
>>
>> That patch works for me - for the ppc64_defconfig build at least.
>
> Yeah, I just tested the allmodconfig case too, although I suspect it's
> essentially the same wrt the boot *.S files, so it probably does
Hi all,
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:08:18 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> That patch works for me - for the ppc64_defconfig build at least.
also allnoconfig, 64bit allnoconfig, pseries_le_defconfig and ppc44x_defconfig
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
pgpJX7oVVSmfh.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital s
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 7:08 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> That patch works for me - for the ppc64_defconfig build at least.
Yeah, I just tested the allmodconfig case too, although I suspect it's
essentially the same wrt the boot *.S files, so it probably doesn't
matter.
I'd like to have Michae
Hi Linus,
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 18:29:26 -0700 Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 5:58 PM Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > > I have no idea why it then complains about removal of the GCC4 macros.
> >
> > Me neither :-(
>
> Ooh.
>
> So I'm looking at gcc sources, just to see if
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:37 PM Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> Anyway, that just makes me think that something like that patch in my
> previous email is the way to go, but I would like to stress (again)
> how little testing it had: exactly none.
>
> So please consider that nothing more than a hand-wavy
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:29 PM Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> Now, do I know *why* that ppc Makefile it does that? No.
Well, that is simple enough to find out..
git show 77433830ed164
just tells us.
Of course, that also points to scripts/Makefile.lib, which doesn't
have this problem, becau
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 5:58 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> > I have no idea why it then complains about removal of the GCC4 macros.
>
> Me neither :-(
Ooh.
So I'm looking at gcc sources, just to see if "maybe this thing is
somehow conditional".
And bingo.
In cpp_init_special_builtins(), gcc d
Hi Linus,
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 17:24:11 -0700 Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 5:19 PM Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > What version of gcc is this? Are you maybe on gcc-4.9 and we just
> > didn't check that properly?
>
> Hmm. That version check works for me (tested by just ar
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 5:19 PM Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> What version of gcc is this? Are you maybe on gcc-4.9 and we just
> didn't check that properly?
Hmm. That version check works for me (tested by just arbitrarily
making min-tool-version return version 15 for gcc ;)
So you got far enough th
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 5:09 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> gcc -Wp,-MD,arch/powerpc/boot/.crt0.o.d
Ok, so it's not the funky "clang reports gcc-4" that caused tool breakage.
What version of gcc is this? Are you maybe on gcc-4.9 and we just
didn't check that properly?
Linus
Xiongwei Song writes:
> Thank you so much Stephen. Sorry for my negligence.
My fault. I forgot to run allyesconfig.
> Should I fix this myself on powerpc tree?
I'll fix it up.
cheers
Thank you so much Stephen. Sorry for my negligence.
Should I fix this myself on powerpc tree?
Regards,
Xiongwei
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 5:14 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/po
Uwe Kleine-König writes:
> Hello,
>
> On 3/2/21 3:09 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Stephen Rothwell writes:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> After merging the powerpc-fixes tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>>> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>>>
>>> drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c:5399:13: error: c
Hello,
On 3/2/21 3:09 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Stephen Rothwell writes:
Hi all,
After merging the powerpc-fixes tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:
drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c:5399:13: error: conflicting types for
'ibmvnic_remove'
5399 | stati
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc-fixes tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c:5399:13: error: conflicting types for
> 'ibmvnic_remove'
> 5399 | static void ibmvnic_remove(struct vio_dev *dev
Hi Nick,
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:20:54 +1000 Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>
> Thanks for that, it's due to .noinstr section being put on the other
> side of .text, so all our interrupt handler asm code can't reach them
> directly anymore since the ppc interrupt wrappers patch added noinstr
> attribute
Excerpts from Stephen Rothwell's message of February 9, 2021 8:19 pm:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/kernel/head_64.o:(__ftr_alt_97+0x0): relocation truncated to
> fit: R_PPC64_REL24 (OPD) against
Daniel Axtens writes:
> Thanks sfr and mpe.
>
>> Applied to powerpc/fixes.
>>
>> [1/1] powerpc/64s: Fix allnoconfig build since uaccess flush
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/b6b79dd53082db11070b4368d85dd6699ff0b063
>
> We also needed a similar fix for stable, which has also been appl
Thanks sfr and mpe.
> Applied to powerpc/fixes.
>
> [1/1] powerpc/64s: Fix allnoconfig build since uaccess flush
>
> https://git.kernel.org/powerpc/c/b6b79dd53082db11070b4368d85dd6699ff0b063
We also needed a similar fix for stable, which has also been applied.
I guess I should build some
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:40:16 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> After merging most of the trees, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/kup.h:18,
> from arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:9,
>
[+Arnd since I think we spoke about this on IRC once]
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 02:35:14PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Now I get the same issue at
>
>CC mm/mincore.o
> In file included from ./include/asm-generic/bug.h:5:0,
> from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h:109,
On 06/04/2020 12:00 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 12:17:23PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi, [+Peter]
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:48:03AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Using mpc885_ads_defconfig with CONFIG_PPC_16K_PAGES instead of
CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES, getting the followin
On 06/04/2020 11:17 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi, [+Peter]
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:48:03AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Using mpc885_ads_defconfig with CONFIG_PPC_16K_PAGES instead of
CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES, getting the following build failure:
CC mm/gup.o
In file included from ./inc
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 12:17:23PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi, [+Peter]
>
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:48:03AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > Using mpc885_ads_defconfig with CONFIG_PPC_16K_PAGES instead of
> > CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES, getting the following build failure:
> >
> > CC mm/
Hi, [+Peter]
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:48:03AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Using mpc885_ads_defconfig with CONFIG_PPC_16K_PAGES instead of
> CONFIG_PPC_4K_PAGES, getting the following build failure:
>
> CC mm/gup.o
> In file included from ./include/linux/kernel.h:11:0,
>
On Wed, 2020-04-22 at 05:41:29 UTC, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from :32:
> ./usr/include/asm/vas-api.h:15:2: error: unknown type name '__u32'
>15 | __u32 versio
Thanks for fixing. Tested with this patch and 7fe021a3f1c9 ("kernel: better
document the use_mm/unuse_mm API contract").
Acked-by: Haren Myneni
On 4/21/20 11:39 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed
Stephen, Sorry missed it. Thanks for fixing it.
Acked-by: Haren Myneni
On 4/21/20 10:41 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> In file included from :32:
> ./usr/include/asm/vas-api.h:15:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 1:17 AM Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 07:04:16PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > Or just squash the hunk Stephen posted into the commit, which is what I
> > thought would happen to begin with.
> >
> > You can have my ack for it:
> >
> > Acked-by: Mic
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 07:04:16PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Or just squash the hunk Stephen posted into the commit, which is what I
> thought would happen to begin with.
>
> You can have my ack for it:
>
> Acked-by: Michael Ellerman (powerpc)
Thanks but considering how this is not reall
Borislav Petkov writes:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 03:08:19PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> What you really need is an Ack from the PowerPC people for the fix you
>> suggested and then tha fix should go in the same series that is now
>> causing the failure (preferably before the problematic (fo
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 03:08:19PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> What you really need is an Ack from the PowerPC people for the fix you
> suggested and then tha fix should go in the same series that is now
> causing the failure (preferably before the problematic (for PowerPC)
> patch.
I'll zap
Hi H.J.,
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:53:42 -0700 "H.J. Lu" wrote:
>
> Please see my enclosing email. Is anyone from PPC community reading emails?
What you really need is an Ack from the PowerPC people for the fix you
suggested and then tha fix should go in the same series that is now
causing the fa
On Mon, 2019-09-30 at 00:13:42 UTC, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c: In function 'flush_partition':
> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c:216:3: error:
On Mon, 2019-09-30 at 00:13:42 UTC, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c: In function 'flush_partition':
> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pgtable.c:216:3: error:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 09:40:11PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc44x_defconfig) failed like this:
Yes, this conflict is expected and we dicussed it before. I'll make
sure Linus is in the loop when sending the p
On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 10:11:44PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Anyway I think what you've done in next, make the code depend on
> COMMON_CLOCK, is the best option. If anyone cares about that driver on
> powerpc platforms that don't support COMMON_CLOCK they should speak up.
It's probably fin
Mark Brown writes:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 03:29:55PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Mark Brown writes:
>
>> > Hrm, seems PowerPC is still not using the common clock API - is there
>> > any plan for that? There are some ASoC PowerPC uses so it's going to be
>> > a bit of an issue as we expa
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 03:29:55PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Mark Brown writes:
> > Hrm, seems PowerPC is still not using the common clock API - is there
> > any plan for that? There are some ASoC PowerPC uses so it's going to be
> > a bit of an issue as we expand our use of the clock API
Mark Brown writes:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 01:33:49PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
>> After merging the sound-asoc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
>> sound/soc/codecs/tlv320aic32x4-clk.c: In function 'clk_aic32x4_pll_prepare':
>> include/linux/ker
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 06:39:15PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> /home/sfr/next/next/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:176:21: error:
> redefinition of 'alloc_stack'
> static void
Christophe Leroy writes:
> Le 22/02/2019 à 08:14, Stephen Rothwell a écrit :
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> make[4]: *** No rule to make target 'arch/powerpc/mm/ptdump/core.o', needed
>> by 'arch/powerp
Le 22/02/2019 à 08:14, Stephen Rothwell a écrit :
Hi all,
After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
allyesconfig) failed like this:
make[4]: *** No rule to make target 'arch/powerpc/mm/ptdump/core.o', needed by
'arch/powerpc/mm/ptdump/built-in.a'.
Caused by commit
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 22:02:45 +1000 Michael Ellerman
> wrote:
>>
>> Ah fudge, what are the chances we add a new include of bootmem.h just as
>> Mike's removing bootmem.
>
> In my experience, it was almost certain ... almost every API removal
> conflicts
Hi Michael,
On Fri, 05 Oct 2018 22:02:45 +1000 Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> Ah fudge, what are the chances we add a new include of bootmem.h just as
> Mike's removing bootmem.
In my experience, it was almost certain ... almost every API removal
conflicts with new added uses. :-)
> I could just
Stephen Rothwell writes:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:36:10: fatal error: linux/bootmem.h: No
> such file or directory
> #include
> ^
>
> Caus
Hi all,
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:26:40 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Building Linus' tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig)
> failed like this:
>
> ld: net/bpfilter/bpfilter_umh.o: compiled for a little endian system and
> target is big endian
> ld: failed to merge target spec
On Thu, 2017-11-02 at 06:49:36 UTC, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc64
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o: In function `.replay_system_reset':
> irq.c:(.text+0x10): undefined reference to `.ppc_save
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 12:15:11PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Al,
> Caused by commit
>
> 4f9365d9e2e7 ("spufs: Implement show_options")
Obvious incremental follows, will fold and push
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c
b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/inode.c
Hi Jens,
On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 09:11:32 -0600 Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> On 06/28/2017 08:01 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > But put_user() is fine? Just checking here, since the change adds
> > both a u64 put and get user.
Yes, put_user is fine (it does 2 4 byte moves. The asm is there to do
the 8 byte g
On 06/28/2017 08:01 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 06/28/2017 06:43 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 06/28/2017 02:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>> Hi Jens,
>>>
>>> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>>> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>>>
>>> fs/fcntl.o: In function `do_fcntl'
On 06/28/2017 06:43 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 06/28/2017 02:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> fs/fcntl.o: In function `do_fcntl':
>> fcntl.c:(.text+0x6d4): undefined reference to
On 06/28/2017 02:04 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> After merging the block tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allnoconfig) failed like this:
>
> fs/fcntl.o: In function `do_fcntl':
> fcntl.c:(.text+0x6d4): undefined reference to `__get_user_bad'
> fcntl.c:(.text+0x730): undefi
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
On Monday, December 5, 2016 4:22:04 PM CET Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After mergeing everything but Andrew's tree, today's linux-next build
> (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> kallsyms failure: relative symbol value 0xc000 out of range in
> relative mode
>
> I
Hi Nick,
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 16:41:53 +1100 Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>
> In scripts/kallsyms.c, is there a table[i].sym string you can print?
From a quick try, it printed nothing useful i.e. just some garbled
random characters.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 16:24:31 +1100
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 16:22:04 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > After mergeing everything but Andrew's tree, today's linux-next build
> > (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > kallsyms failure: relative sym
Hi all,
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 16:22:04 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> After mergeing everything but Andrew's tree, today's linux-next build
> (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> kallsyms failure: relative symbol value 0xc000 out of range in
> relative mode
>
> I have no i
Hi Thiago,
On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 13:02:39 -0200 Thiago Jung Bauermann
wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag, 24. November 2016, 16:01:51 BRST schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> >
Hello Stephen,
Am Donnerstag, 24. November 2016, 16:01:51 BRST schrieb Stephen Rothwell:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> powerpc-linux-ld: unrecognized option '--no-dynamic-linker'
>
> Caused by pat
On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 21:21:14 +1100
Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 19:58:32 +1100 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > After merging the powerpc tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > allyesconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > Inconsistent kallsyms data
> > Try make K
1 - 100 of 216 matches
Mail list logo
