On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 11:13 AM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 23:45:18 +0800 kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > tree/branch: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master > > branch HEAD: d01f2f7e35573049673b71e18be7abfe3f80323f Add linux-next specific files for 20210226 > > > > ... > > > > page_alloc.c:(.text+0xe028): undefined reference to `node_reclaim_distance' > > riscv32-linux-ld: page_alloc.c:(.text+0xe02c): undefined reference to `node_reclaim_distance' > > > > ... > > > > |-- riscv-randconfig-p001-20210226 > > | |-- page_alloc.c:(.text):undefined-reference-to-node_reclaim_distance > > | `-- riscv32-linux-ld:page_alloc.c:(.text):undefined-reference-to-node_reclaim_distance > > I assume the riscv randconfig managed to create a .config with > CONFIG_NUMA=n, CONFIG_SMP=y. Configuration doesn't make a lot of > sense, unless someone has a single-CPU machine with cpuless nodes... > > Could the riscv maintainers please test and merge this? > Yeah. This was discussed a week back. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-riscv/2021-February/004640.html @Palmer Dabbelt Is the fix merged in the PR ? > --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig~a > +++ a/arch/riscv/Kconfig > @@ -314,6 +314,7 @@ endchoice > # Common NUMA Features > config NUMA > bool "NUMA Memory Allocation and Scheduler Support" > + depends on SMP > select GENERIC_ARCH_NUMA > select OF_NUMA > select ARCH_SUPPORTS_NUMA_BALANCING > _ > > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-riscv mailing list > linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv -- Regards, Atish
