On 8/25/20 4:52 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 08:20:27 -0700 Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Fix build errors when CONFIG_ACPI is not set/enabled by adding >> <acpi/acpi_numa.h> in the #else (!CONFIG_ACPI) block. >> >> ../arch/x86/mm/numa.c: In function ‘numa_setup’: >> ../arch/x86/mm/numa.c:43:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘disable_srat’; did you mean ‘disable_irq’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >> disable_srat(); >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ../arch/x86/mm/numa.c:45:3: error: implicit declaration of function ‘disable_hmat’; did you mean ‘disable_dma’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >> disable_hmat(); >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> ... >> >> --- mmotm-2020-0824-1606.orig/include/linux/acpi.h >> +++ mmotm-2020-0824-1606/include/linux/acpi.h >> @@ -709,6 +709,8 @@ static inline u64 acpi_arch_get_root_poi >> #define ACPI_HANDLE_FWNODE(fwnode) (NULL) >> #define ACPI_DEVICE_CLASS(_cls, _msk) .cls = (0), .cls_msk = (0), >> >> +#include <acpi/acpi_numa.h> >> + >> struct fwnode_handle; >> >> static inline bool acpi_dev_found(const char *hid) > > I don't think there's anything in -next that caused this? It's in > mainline also? > Calls to disable_srat() and disable_hmat() are not in v5.9-rc2. If they are in mainline, they were added after -rc2. See these patches in mmotm: x86-numa-add-nohmat-option.patch x86-numa-cleanup-configuration-dependent-command-line-options.patch -- ~Randy
