On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 11:14:18AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:00:35 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> make[1]: *** [arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.o] Error 1 > > >> make: *** [arch/x86/kernel] Error 2 > > >> > > >> linux-next patches has the changes to the adds the function > > >> __ptep_modify_prot_start as inline, the patch s390-build-fixes.patch > > >> is coverting it into macro. Reverting the s390-build-fixes.patch > > >> fixes the build failure. > > >> > > > > > > grump. Who did all this stuff? > > > > > > I dunno. I'll drop s390-build-fixes.patch, add some ccs and stomp off. > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > In file included from include/asm/pgtable.h:1087, > > > from include/linux/mm.h:39, > > > from arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c:8: > > > include/asm-generic/pgtable.h: In function '__ptep_modify_prot_start': > > > include/asm-generic/pgtable.h:209: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > > > > > > > We can't turn them into macros because we're expecting to be able to > > take the address of __ptep_modify_prot_start/commit. What type is not > > defined on s390 at that point? Would simply adding an extra include to > > arch/s390/mm/hugetlbpage.c fix the problem? We need struct task_struct... I added an include <linux/sched.h> to asm-s390/pgtable.h and it seems to fix the build problem. I expected include dependency hell... > > In the worst case we could push __ptep_modify_proc_start/commit out of > > line somewhere appropriate, but that's a bit sad given how simple they are. > > I think the s390 guys just fixed the original build error. Not this one, but if it works I'm going to push that to git-s390. Currently wading through the s390 build bugs in linux-next and trying to fix them all :/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
